Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-06-2024 Agenda PacketMayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR HOUSING AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SAN BERNARDINO JOINT POWERS FINANCING AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 06, 2024 4:00 PM ­ CLOSED SESSION 5:00 PM ­ OPEN SESSION FELDHEYM CENTRAL LIBRARY • SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92410 • WWW.SBCITY.ORG Theodore Sanchez Helen Tran Damon L. Alexander COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 1 COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 7 MAYOR Sandra Ibarra Rochelle Clayton COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 2 ACTING CITY MANAGER Juan Figueroa Sonia Carvalho COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 3 CITY ATTORNEY Fred Shorett Genoveva Rocha MAYOR PRO TEM, WARD 4 CITY CLERK Ben Reynoso COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 5 Kimberly Calvin COUNCIL MEMBER, WARD 6 Welcome to a meeting of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino PLEASE VIEW THE LAST PAGES OF THE AGENDA FOR PUBLIC COMMENT OPTIONS, OR CLICK ON THE FOLLOWING LINK: TINYURL.COM/MCCPUBLICCOMMENTS PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE (909) 384­5002 TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO THE MEETING FOR ANY REQUESTS FOR REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS To view PowerPoint presentations, written comments, or any revised documents for this meeting date, use this link: tinyurl.com/agendabackup. Select the corresponding year and meeting date folders to view documents. Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 2 CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Council Member, Ward 1 Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 2 Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 3 Juan Figueroa Mayor Pro Tem, Ward 4 Fred Shorett Council Member, Ward 5 Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 6 Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 7 Damon L. Alexander Mayor Helen Tran Acting City Manager Rochelle Clayton City Attorney Sonia Carvalho City Clerk Genoveva Rocha 4:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED SESSION Pg. 11 A) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ­ EXISTING LITIGATION (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) and (d)(1): i) Ortiz Enterprises, Incorporated v. City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. CIVSB240279 B) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957) Title: City Manager C) CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6) Agency designated representatives: Mayor or other Mayor and Council designee Unrepresented employee: City Manager 5:00 P.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CLOSED SESSION REPORT PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS LISTED AND NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA CITY MANAGER UPDATE Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 3 CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Adopting and Amending the Conflict of Interest Code Pursuant to the Political Reform Act of 1974 Pg. 12 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino California adopt Resolution No. 2024­214, approving and adopting the amended Conflict of Interest Code pursuant to the Political Reform Act of 1974. 2. Approval of Various Mayor and City Council Meeting Minutes Pg. 68 Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve the minutes for the following meeting dates: 1. June 7, 2023 Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 2. June 26, 2023 Special Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 3. July 19, 2023, Regular Meeting of the mayor and City Council 4. July 3, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 5. July 17, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 6. August 7, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 7. August 21, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 8. September 4, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 3. Resolution Declaring Intent to Annex Territory: Community Facilities District No. 2019­1 (Maintenance Services): Annexation No. 48, Tax Zone No. 48 (Piedmont Mobile Home Estates) (Ward 4) Pg. 170 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024­215 of the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, declaring its intention to annex territory into Community Facilities District No. 2019­1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino, adopting a map of the area to be proposed (Annexation No. 48) and authorizing the levy of a special taxes therein. 4. Resolution Declaring Intent to Annex Territory: Community Facilities District No. 2019­1 (Maintenance Services): Annexation No. 47, Tax Zone No. 47 (Dutch Bros Coffee) (Ward 3) Pg. 203 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024­216 of the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, declaring its intention to annex territory into Community Facilities District No. 2019­1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino, adopting a map of the area to be proposed (Annexation No. 47) and authorizing the levy of a special taxes therein. 5. Review of Administrative Budget Transfers from April 1, 2024 through June 30, 2024. Pg. 243 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, review and file all listed administrative budget transfers from April 1, 2024 through June 30, 2024. 6. Review of Administrative Budget Transfers from July 1, 2024 through September 30, 2024 (All Wards) Pg. 252 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, review and file all listed administrative budget transfers from July 1, 2024, through September 30, 2024. Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 4 7. Request for Approval to Renew Trend Micro Vision One Subscription and add Tipping Point a Threat Protection System (TPS). Pg. 260 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California approve the renewal of the Trend Micro Vision One Subscription and the addition of TippingPoint a Threat Protection System (TPS) to our cybersecurity measures for a 3­year term not to exceed $584,681.14. 8. Library Literacy Program Grant Funding (All Wards) Pg. 277 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024­217, approving: 1. Accepting grant funding of $50,000 from the California Department of Education (CDE) and a “block grant” of $73,200 for Adult and Family Literacy Services from the California State Library’s California Library Literacy Services (CLLS) Program. 2. Authorizing the Interim Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2024/25 Operating Budget for the Literacy program including adjusting the CDE budget to account for any differences in the estimated grant funding versus the actual grant funding received and appropriating $73,200 of grant funding in both revenues and expenditures for the California Adult and Family Literacy Programs. 9. Award of the Professional Services Agreement to T&G Global, LLC dba St. Nick’s, in the amount of $192,000 over two years, for the Tree, Lighting and Decorations for Holiday Events. (All Wards) Pg. 327 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Authorize the City Manager or their designee to execute a Professional Services Agreement with T&G Global, LLC dba St. Nick’s, for Tree Rental, Tree Lighting, and Decorations for Court Street Square Park and Parking lots for the Miracle on Court Street Holiday Event for a 2­year rental term; and 2. Authorize City Manager or their designee to conduct all negotiations, signings, and submittals of necessary documents; and 3. Authorize the Director of Finance and Management Services to issue a purchase order of $96,000 annually for FY 24/25 & 25/26. 10. Approve Final Tract Map No. 20376 for 9 Townhouse Residential Units at the Northwest Corner of E. Pacific Street and N. Garden Drive (Ward 2) Pg. 370 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024­218: 1. Approving Final Tract Map No. 20376 (Subdivision 20­06) involving the subdivision a parcel (APN 0147­231­07) containing approximately 0.77 acres and the development and establishment of a townhouse development comprised of nine (9) detached residential units, located at the northwest corner of E. Pacific Street and N. Garden Drive; 2. Accepting the public dedications as set forth on said map; and 3. Authorizing execution of the standard form of agreement for the subdivision improvements. Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 5 11. Amendment No. 1 to Agreement with Environmental Project Services, Inc. for Citywide Sidewalk Repairs and Maintenance (All Wards) Pg. 465 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to Maintenance Services Agreement with Environmental Project Services, Inc. for Concrete Maintenance Services; and 2. Authorize the Director of Finance and Management Services to issue a change purchase order in not to exceed amount of $2,000,000. 12. Five­Year Capital Project Needs Analysis for FY 2025/26 to FY 2029/2030 for Measure I Expenditures (All Wards) Pg. 500 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024­219 approving the Five­Year Capital Project Needs Analysis (FY 2025/2026 through FY 2029/30) for Measure I Expenditure. 13. Annexation of the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project and the 26­Acre Totally Surrounded Island (Ward 5) Pg.515 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt: 1. Resolution No. 2024­220 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, making application to the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County (LAFCO) for Reorganization to include Annexation to the City of San Bernardino and Detachment from County Service Area 70, generally northerly of Meyers Road and Easterly of Martin Ranch Road (known as the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project); and 2. Resolution No. 2024­221 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, making an application to the Local Agency Formation Commission of San Bernardino County (LAFCO) for Reorganization to include Annexation to the City of San Bernardino and Detachment from County Service Area 70, generally northerly of Meyers Road and Easterly of Martin Ranch Road (known as the 26­Acre Totally Surrounded Island); and 3. Direct the City Manager to transmit the Resolutions to the Director of the Local Agency Formation Commission. DISCUSSION 14. Confirm Appointment and Approve Employment Agreement for the Position of City Manager Pg. 968 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approve and authorize the Mayor to execute an employment agreement for the position of City Manager with Rochelle Clayton, with an effective date of October 2, 2024, as decided by the City Council and reported in public on the same date. Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 6 MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL UPDATES/REPORTS ON CONFERENCES & MEETINGS ADJOURNMENT The next joint regular meeting of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency will be held on November 20, 2024 at the Feldheym Central Library located at 555 West 6th Street, San Bernardino, California 92401. Closed Session will begin at 4:00 p.m. and Open Session will begin at 5:00 p.m. Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 7 CERTIFICATION OF POSTING AGENDA I, Telicia Lopez, CMC, Chief Deputy City Clerk for the City of San Bernardino, California, hereby certify that the agenda for the November 6, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency was posted on the City's bulletin board located at 201 North "E" Street, San Bernardino, California, at the Feldheym Central Library located at 555 West 6th Street, San Bernardino, California, and on the City's website sbcity.org on Friday, November 1, 2024. I declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Telicia Lopez Telicia Lopez, CMC, Chief Deputy City Clerk Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 8 NOTICE: Any member of the public desiring to speak to the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency concerning any matter on the agenda, which is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency may address the body during the period reserved for public comments. In accordance with Resolution No. 2018­89 adopted by the Mayor and City Council on March 21, 2018, the following are the rules set forth for Public Comments and Testimony: Public Comments and Testimony: Rule 1. Public comment shall be received on a first come, first served basis. If the presiding officer determines that the meeting or hearing may be lengthy or complicated, the presiding officer may, in his or her discretion, modify these rules, including the time limits stated below. Rule 2. All members of the public who wish to speak shall fill out a speaker' s reservation card and turn in the speaker reservation card to the City Clerk prior to the time designated on the agenda. Comments will be received in the order the cards are turned in to the City Clerk. Failure of a person to promptly respond when their time to speak is called shall result in the person forfeiting their right to address the Mayor and City Council. Rule 3. The presiding officer may request that a member of the public providing comment audibly state into the microphone, if one is present, his or her name and address before beginning comment. If that person is representing a group or organization the presiding officer may request that the speaker identify that group or organization, including that group or organization' s Address. Rule 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of Rule 2 and 3 above, a person shall not be required to provide their name or address as a condition of speaking. Rule 5. Time Limits: 5.01 Each member of the public shall have a reasonable time, not to exceed three ( 3) minutes per meeting, to address items on the agenda and items not on the agenda but within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Mayor and City Council. 5.02 Notwithstanding the time limits set forth in subsection 5. 01 above, any member of the public desiring to provide public testimony at a public hearing shall have a reasonable time, not to exceed ( 3) minutes, to provide testimony during each public hearing. Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 9 Any member of the public desiring to speak to the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency concerning any matter not on the agenda but which is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency may address the body at the end of the meeting, during the period reserved for public comments. Said total period for public comments shall not exceed 60 minutes, unless such time limit is extended by the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency. A three­minute limitation shall apply to each member of the public, unless such time limit is extended by the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency. No member of the public shall be permitted to "share" his/her three minutes with any other member of the public. Speakers who wish to present documents to the governing body may hand the documents to the City Clerk at the time the request to speak is made. The Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency may refer any item raised by the public to staff, or to any commission, board, bureau, or committee for appropriate action or have the item placed on the next agenda of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency. However, no other action shall be taken nor discussion held by the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency on any item which does not appear on the agenda unless the action is otherwise authorized in accordance with the provisions of subdivision (b) of Section 54954.2 of the Government Code. Public comments will not be received on any item on the agenda when a public hearing has been conducted and closed. Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 10 ALTERNATE MEETING VIEWING METHOD: If there are issues with the main live stream for the Mayor and City Council you may view the alternate stream on TV3 https://reflect­sanbernardino.cablecast.tv/CablecastPublicSite/watch/1?channel=6 PUBLIC COMMENT OPTIONS Please use ONE of the following options to provide a public comment: Written comments can be emailed to publiccomments@sbcity.org. Written public comments received up to 2:30 p.m. on the day of the meeting (or otherwise indicated on the agenda) will be provided to the Mayor and City council and made part of the meeting record. Written public comments will not be read aloud by city staff. Written correspondence can be accessed by the public online at tinyurl.com/agendabackup . Attend the meeting in person and fill out a speaker slip. Please note that the meeting Chair decides the cutoff time for public comment, and the time may vary per meeting. If you wish to submit your speaker slip in advance of the meeting, please submit your request to speak using the form on the following page: tinyurl.com/mccpubliccomments. Any requests to speak submitted electronically after the 2:30 p.m. deadline will not be accepted. Please note: messages submitted via email and this page are only monitored from the publication of the final agenda until the deadline to submit public comments. Please contact the City Clerk at 9093845002 or SBCityClerk@sbcity.org for assistance outside of this timeframe. Written correspondence submitted after the deadline will be provided to the Mayor and City Council at the following regular meeting. MEETING TIME NOTE: Pursuant to Resolution No. 2024029, adopted by the Mayor and City Council on February 21, 2024: “Section 3. All meetings are scheduled to terminate at 10:00 P.M. on the same day it began. At 9:00 P.M., the Mayor and City Council shall determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 P.M. and will continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future Mayor and City Council meeting. A majority vote of the Council is required to extend a meeting beyond 10:00 P.M.to discuss specified items.” CLOSED SESSION City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Sonia Carvalho, City Attorney Department:City Attorney Subject:CLOSED SESSION Recommendation: A) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) and (d)(1): i.) Ortiz Enterprises, Incorporated v. City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. CIVSB240279 B) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957) Title: City Manager C) CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6) Agency designated representatives: Mayor or other Mayor and Council designee Unrepresented employee: City Manager        Packet Page. 11 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Genoveva Rocha, City Clerk Department:City Clerk Subject:Adopting and Amending the Conflict of Interest Code Pursuant to the Political Reform Act of 1974 (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino California adopt Resolution No. 2024-214, approving and adopting the amended Conflict of Interest Code pursuant to the Political Reform Act of 1974. Executive Summary The Political Reform Act (PRA) is a California law designed to promote transparency in government and establishes guidelines for disclosure of financial interests. Agencies are mandated to update their conflict-of-interest codes periodically to reflect changes in their operational landscape, shifts in personnel, changes in the agency's functions, and modifications in the law. Revisions also account for new positions or roles within the agency that may require disclosure of financial interests. Staff has completed a review of the city’s conflict-of-interest code and identified the necessary amendments. Background The Political Reform Act of 1974, Government Code Section 8100 et seq. (the “Act”, requires all public agencies to adopt and maintain a Conflict of Interest Code. The Act further requires that agencies regularly review and update their Codes as necessary, as directed by the code-reviewing body or when change is necessitated by changed circumstances (Sections 87306 and 87306.5). The City Council is the City’s code- reviewing body. As the code-reviewing body, the City Council directed that the Code be reviewed as required under the Act. During this review, staff found that amendments to the Code are necessary. A Conflict of Interest Code requires certain employees who are most likely to be in a government decision making capacity and where potential conflicts may occur to file an annual disclosure form. This Statement of Economic Interest Form, also known as the Form 700, provides transparency and ensures accountability in two ways:        Packet Page. 12 •It provides necessary information to the public about an official’s personal financial interests to ensure that officials are making decisions in the best interest of the public and not enhancing their personal finances; and •It serves as a reminder to the public official of potential conflicts of interest so the official can abstain from making or participating in governmental decisions that are deemed conflicts of interest. Discussion Pursuant to the Political Reform Act (the “Act”), : (1) staff conducted a review of the City’s Conflict of Interest Code (“Code”) to determine if a change in the Code was necessary; (2) filed a biennial notice regarding the results of the review no later than required deadline and (3) amended the City’s Code pursuant to the act. Attached is a legislative (redlined) version of the proposed amended Code. The proposed revisions are based on the establishment and recognition of new positions that must be designated, the revision of titles of existing positions, and revise disclosure categories. The disclosure categories listed below identify the types of economic interests that the designated position must disclose for each disclosure category to which the designated position is assigned. “Investment” means financial interest in any business entity (including a consulting business or other independent contracting business) and are reportable if they are either located in, doing business in, planning to do business in, or have done business during the previous two years in the jurisdiction of the City. The disclosure categories are: Category 1: All investments and business positions and sources of income, including gifts loans and travel payments, that are located in, do business in, or own real property within the jurisdiction of the City. Category 2: All interests in real property which is located in whole or in part within, or not more than two (2) miles outside, the boundaries of the City, including any leasehold, beneficial or ownership interest or option to acquire property. Category 3: All investments and business positions in, business entities, and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, that are engaged in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property within the jurisdiction of the City. Category 4: All investments, business positions and income from business entities and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, that provide services, products, materials, machinery, vehicles or equipment of a type purchased or leased by the City.        Packet Page. 13 Category 5: All investments, business positions and income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, that provide services, products, materials, machinery, vehicles or equipment of a type purchased or leased by the designated position’s department, unit or division. Category 6: All investment and business positions in business entities and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, subject to the regulatory, permit, licensing authority of the designated employee’s department, unit or division. Category 6: All investment and business positions in business entities and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, subject to the regulatory, permit, licensing authority of the designated employee’s department, unit or division. Category 7: All investments and business positions in business entities, and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, or income from a nonprofit organization, if the source is of the type to receive grants or other monies from or through the City or its subdivisions. Category 8: All investments and business positions in business entities, and sources of income, including gifts, loans, and travel payments, if such entities or sources have filed claims against the agency in the past 2 years, or have a claim pending before the agency. 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals The request for adopting the amended conflict of interest code aligns with Key Target No. 1e: Improved Operational & Financial Capacity - Minimize Risk and litigation exposure. The code helps identify potential conflicts of interest; the law requires public officials and employees in designated positions in a conflict-of-interest code to report their financial interests on a form called Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700). Fiscal Impact There is no fiscal impact to the city in adopting the amended Conflict of Interest Code. Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution No. 2024-214 approving and adopting the amended Conflict of Interest Code pursuant to the Political Reform Act of 1974. Attachments Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 2024-214 Adopting the Amended Conflict of Interest Code Attachment 2 – Conflict of Interest Code (Legislative) Attachment 3 – Conflict of Interest Code (Final) Attachment 4 – Notice of Intention Attachment 5 – Regulation 18730 Provisions of the Conflict of Interest Code Ward:        Packet Page. 14 All Wards Synopsis of Previous Council Actions: March 1, 2023 – The Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-034 approved and adopted the amended Conflict of Interest Code pursuant to the Political Reform Act of 1974. March 3, 2021 – The Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-048 approving and adopting the amended Conflict of Interest Code pursuant to the Political Reform Act of 1974.        Packet Page. 15 Resolution No. 2024-214 Resolution No. 2024-214 November 6, 2024 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-214 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING AN AMENDED CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE PURSUANT TO THE POLITICAL REFORM ACT OF 1974 WHEREAS, the State of California enacted the Political Reform Act of 1974, Government Code Section 81000 et seq. (the “Act”), which contains provisions relating to conflicts of interest which potentially affect all officers, employees and consultants of the City of San Bernardino (the “City”) and requires all public agencies to adopt and promulgate a Conflict of Interest Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Conflict of Interest Code (the “Code”) in compliance with the Act which was last amended March 1, 2023; and WHEREAS, subsequent changed circumstances within the City have made it advisable and necessary pursuant to Sections 87306 and 87307 of the Act to amend and update the City’s Code; and WHEREAS, the potential penalties for violation of the provisions of the Act are substantial and may include criminal and civil liability, as well as equitable relief which could result in the City being restrained or prevented from acting in cases where the provisions of the Act may have been violated; and WHEREAS, notice of the time and place of a public meeting on, and of consideration by the City Council of, the proposed amended Code was provided each affected designated employee and publicly posted for review; and WHEREAS, a public meeting was held upon the proposed amended Code at a regular meeting of the City Council on November 6, 2024, at which all present were given an opportunity to be heard on the proposed amended Code. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby adopt the proposed amended Conflict of Interest Code, a copy of which is attached hereto and shall be on file with the City Clerk and available to the public for inspection and copying during regular business hours; and SECTION 2. The said amended Conflict of Interest Code shall become effective immediately after the date of its adoption and approval.        Packet Page. 16 Resolution No. 2024-214 Resolution No. 2024-214 November 6, 2024 Page 2 of 3 APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 6th day of November 2024. Helen Tran, Mayor City of San Bernardino Attest: Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk Approved as to form: Sonia Carvalho, City Attorney        Packet Page. 17 Resolution No. 2024-214 Resolution No. 2024-214 November 6, 2024 Page 3 of 3 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) I, Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2024-214, adopted at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of November 2024 by the following vote: Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT SANCHEZ _____ _____ _______ _______ IBARRA _____ _____ _______ _______ FIGUEROA _____ _____ _______ _______ SHORETT _____ _____ _______ _______ REYNOSO _____ _____ _______ _______ CALVIN _____ _____ _______ _______ ALEXANDER _____ _____ _______ _______ WITNESS my hand and official seal of the City of San Bernardino this ___ day of ____________ 2024. Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk        Packet Page. 18 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP BBK – February 2023 October 2024 CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO        Packet Page. 19 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO (Amended March 1, 2023 November 6, 2024) The Political Reform Act (Gov. Code § 81000, et seq.) requires state and local government agencies to adopt and promulgate conflict of interest codes. The Fair Political Practices Commission has adopted a regulation, (tit. 2 Cal. Code of Regs, § 18730), that contains the terms of a standard conflict of interest code which can be incorporated by reference in an agency’s code. After public notice and hearing, Regulation 18730 may be amended by the Fair Political Practices Commission to conform to amendments in the Political Reform Act. Therefore, the terms of 2 California Code of Regulations section 18730 and any amendments to it duly adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission are hereby incorporated by reference. This incorporation page, Regulation 18730 and the attached Appendix designating positions and establishing disclosure categories, shall constitute the Conflict of Interest Code of the City of San Bernardino (“City"). The Mayor, Members of the City Council and Planning Commission, the City Manager, the City Attorney and the City Treasurer, shall electronically file their annual statements of economic interests directly with the Fair Political Practices Commission. All other officials and designated positions required to submit a statement of economic interests shall file their statements with the City Clerk as the City’s Filing Officer. All officials and designated positions required to submit a statement of economic Interests shall file their statements with the City Clerk as the Town’s Filing Officer. The City Clerk shall make and retain a copy of all statements filed by the Mayor, members of the City Council, the City Manager, the City Attorney and the City Treasurer, and forward the originals of these statements to the Fair Political Practices Commission. The City Clerk shall retain the original statements filed by all other officials and designated positions and will make all retained statements available for public inspection and reproduction during regular business hours. (Gov. Code § 81008)        Packet Page. 20 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-1 BBK – February 2023 October 2024 APPENDIX CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO (Amended March 1, 2023 November 6, 2024) PART “A” The Mayor, Members of the City Council and Planning Commission, the City Manager, the City Attorney, the City Treasurer, and all Other City Officials who manage public investments as defined by 2 Cal. Code of Regs. § 18700.3(b), are NOT subject to the City’s Code but must file disclosure statements under Government Code Section 87200 et seq. [Regs. § 18730(b)(3)] OFFICIALS WHO MANAGE PUBLIC INVESTMENTS It has been determined that the positions listed below are Other City Officials who manage public investments.1 These positions are listed here for informational purposes only. Investment Consultants 1 Individuals holding one of the above-listed positions may contact the Fair Political Practices Commission for assistance or written advice regarding their filing obligations if they believe that their position has been categorized incorrectly. The Fair Political Practices Commission makes the final determination whether a position is covered by § 87200.        Packet Page. 21 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-2 BBK – February 2023 October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS GOVERNED BY THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE Accountant III 5 Accounting Division Manager 5 Administrative Analyst (ALL) 5 Administrative Division Manager 5 Administrative Services Supervisor 5 Administrative Supervisor and Executive Assistant to the City Manager 5 Agency Director of Administrative Finance and Management Services 4 Agency Director of Community, Housing and Economic Development and Housing 1, 2 Agency Director of Public Works, Operations and Maintenance 1, 2 Animal Services Manager 5 Animal Services Supervisor 5 Aquatics Supervisor 5 Assistant Building Official 3, 5, 6 Assistant Buyer 5 Assistant Chief of Police 5 Assistant City Manager 1, 2 Assistant Planner 3, 5, 6 Assistant to the City Manager 5 Assistant to the Mayor 5 Assistant to the Mayor III 5 Associate Planner 3, 5, 6 Auditor (ALL) 5 Budget Division Manager 4 Budget Officer 4 Building Inspector (ALL) 3, 5, 6 Building Maintenance Division Manager 3, 5 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED        Packet Page. 22 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-3 BBK – February 2023 October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Building Official 3, 5, 6 Business Registration Manager 5, 6 Buyer 4 CATV Broadcast Engineering Coordinator 5 Capital Improvement Project Manager 2, 3, 5, 7 Chief Assistant City Attorney 1, 2 Chief Building Official and Safety Division Manager 3, 5, 6 Chief Deputy City Clerk 1, 2 Chief of Police 5 Chief of Staff 5 City Clerk 5 City Engineer 1, 2 Civil Engineering Division Manager 1, 2 Code Enforcement Division Manager 5 Code Enforcement Officer (ALL) 5 Community Development Block Grant (CBDG) Coordinator 5, 7 Community Intervention Program Manager 5, 7 Community Policing Specialist 5 Community Recreation Center Supervisor 5 Community Recreation Manager 5 Community Recreation Program Coordinator 5 Community Recreation Program Supervisor (Soccer) 5 Community Relations Supervisor Assistant to the City Manager 5 Community Services Center Supervisor 5 Community Services Officer Supervisor 5 Community Services Program Coordinator 5 Construction Inspector (ALL) 3, 6 Construction/Survey Manager 2, 5 Council Administrative Supervisor 5        Packet Page. 23 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-4 BBK – February 2023 October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Custodial Supervisor 5 Deputy City Attorney (ALL) 1, 2 Deputy City Clerk I 5 Deputy City Clerk II 5 Deputy City Manager 1, 2 Deputy Director City Engineer 1, 2 Deputy Director of Animal Services 5 Deputy Director of Economic Development 1, 2 Deputy Director of Finance Dept. and Management Services 4 Deputy Director of Housing and Homelessness 5, 7 Deputy Director of Human Resources and Risk Management 5 Deputy Director of Information Technology 5 Deputy Director of Operations 5 Deputy Director of Parks, Recreation & Community 1, 2 Deputy Director of Public Works-City Engineer 1, 2 Deputy Director/City Planner 1, 2 Deputy Engineer 1, 2 Deputy General Manager 1, 2 Deputy Library Director 5 Development Services Technician 5 Director of Animal Services 5 Director of Community & Economic Development 1, 2 Director of Economic Development 1, 2 Director of Finance 4 Director of Human Resources 5 Director of IT 5 Director of Parks, Recreation & Community Services 1, 2 Director of Public Works 1, 2 Director, Water Reclamation 3, 5, 6        Packet Page. 24 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-5 BBK – February 2023 October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Director, Water Utility 3, 5, 6 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Specialist 5 Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion Officer 5 Economic Development Division Manager 1, 2 Economic Development Manager 5 Economic Development Project Manager 1, 2 Electrical, Instrumentation, and SCADA Superintendent 5 Emergency Operations Manager 5 Engineering Assistant (ALL) 2, 3, 6 Engineering Associate 2, 5 Engineering Manager 2, 3, 5 Engineering Project Manager 2, 3, 5 Engineering Technician 5, 6 Environmental Programs Coordinator 2, 5 Environmental Control Officer Supervisor 2, 5 Equipment Maintenance Manager 5 Equipment Maintenance Supervisor 5 Executive Staff Assistant to the City Council 5 Facilities & Fleet Maintenance Division Manager 5 Facilities Maintenance Supervisor 5 Financial Analyst 5 Fleet Parts Storekeeper 5 Fleet/Warehouse Supervisor 4 Forensic Supervisor 5 Forestry Supervisor 5 General Manager – Water 1, 2 GIS Administrator 5 Grant Analyst 5, 7 Grant Division Manager 5, 7        Packet Page. 25 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-6 BBK – February 2023 October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Grant Manager 5, 7 Grants Assistant 5, 7 Homeless Services Coordinator 5, 7 Homeless Solutions Manager 5, 7 Housing Compliance Officer 5 Housing Division Manager 5, 7 Housing Manager 1, 2 HR Analyst (ALL) 5 Human Resources Division Manager 5 Human Resources Generalist 5 HVAC Supervisor 5 IEMG Broadcast Engineering Coordinator 5 Information Technology Manager 5 Information Technology Manager 5 Information Technology Operations Supervisor 5 IT Operations Supervisor 5 Landscape and Irrigation Inspector (ALL) 3, 5 Land Development Engineer 2, 3 ,5 Landscape Inspector (ALL) 3, 5 Landscape Maintenance District Supervisor 3, 5 Lead Building Inspector 3, 5 Lead Code Enforcement Officer 5 Legislative & Governmental Affairs Manager 5 Library Administrative Supervisor 5 Library Circulation Supervisor 5 Library Director 5 Library IT Manager 5 Library Network Administrator 5 Library Program Coordinator 5        Packet Page. 26 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-7 BBK – February 2023 October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Maintenance Supervisor 5 Management Analyst II 5, 7 Manager of Communications 5 Marketing and Public Relations Specialist 5 Neighborhood & Customer Service Manager 5 Network Systems Administrator 5 NPDES Inspector II 3, 5, 6 NPDES Manager 3, 5, 6 Operations & Maintenance Division Manager 2, 5 Parks and Landscape Maintenance Supervisor 5 Parks and Landscape Supervisor 5 Parks Construction Lead Worker 5 Parks Maintenance Division Manager 5 Parks Ranger Supervisor 5 Parks Superintendent 3, 5 Permit Services Supervisor 5, 6 Planning Division Manager 2, 3, 5, 6 Plans Examiner (ALL) 2, 3, 5, 6 Police Captain 5 Police Dispatch Manager 5 Police Dispatch Supervisor 5 Police Lieutenant 5 Principal Civil Engineer 2, 3, 5, 6 Principal Engineer, Public Works Dept. 2, 5 Principal Engineer, Water Dept. 2, 3, 5 Principal Planner 2, 3, 5, 6 Procurement/Contract Support Services Division Manager [Position’s title revised to Purchasing Division Manager listed below]5 Project Manager 2, 3, 5        Packet Page. 27 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-8 BBK – February 2023 October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Project Manager of Community Development Programs 5 Project Manager of Housing Programs 3, 5 Public Information Officer 5 Public Safety and Training Officer 5 Public Safety IT Manager 5 Public Works Inspector III 3, 5 Purchasing Division Manager 4 5 Rangemaster 5 Real Property Manager 1, 2 Real Property Specialist 1, 2 Recreation Therapist 5 Retired & Senior Volunteer Program Manager 5 Risk Division Manager 5, 8 Senior Civil Engineer 2, 3, 5, 6 Senior Civil Engineer/Division Manager 2, 3, 5, 6 Senior Code Enforcement Officer 5 Senior Companion Program Manager 5 Senior GIS Analyst 5 Senior HR/Risk Analyst 5 Senior Human Resources Technician 5 Senior IT Analyst 5 Senior Librarian 5 Senior Management Analyst 5 Senior Network Administrator 5 Senior Network Specialist 5 Senior Network System Administrator 5 Senior Nutrition Food Services Supervisor 5 Senior Planner 2, 3, 5 Senior Plans Examiner 2, 3, 5, 6        Packet Page. 28 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-9 BBK – February 2023 October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Station Manager 5 Street Signal/Lighting Supervisor 5 Supervising Human Resources Analyst 5 Technology Librarian 5 Traffic Engineer 2, 3, 5 Traffic Engineering Associate 2, 3, 5 Traffic Operations Systems Analyst 2, 3, 5 Traffic Signal and Lighting Supervisor 3, 5 Treasury Manager 5 Treasury Supervisor 1, 2 Water Reclamation Maintenance Superintendent 5 Water Reclamation Operations Superintendent 5 Water Utility Distribution Superintendent 5 Water Utility Operations Superintendent 5 Water Utility Water Quality Control Officer 5 DESIGNATED BOARDS/COMMITTEES/COMMISSIONS Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino 1, 2 Board of Building Commissioners/ Building Appeals Board 1, 2 Personnel Commission 1, 2 Board of Library Trustees 1, 2 Board of Water Commissioners 1, 2 Consultants        Packet Page. 29 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-10 BBK – February 2023 October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Consultants and New Positions2 2 Individuals serving as a consultant as defined in FPPC Reg. 18700.3(a) or in a new position must file under the broadest disclosure category set forth in this Code subject to the following limitation: The City Manager may determine that, due to the range of duties or contractual obligations, it is more appropriate to designate a limited disclosure requirement. A clear explanation of the duties and a statement of the extent of the disclosure requirements must be in a written document. The City Manager’s determination is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this Conflict of Interest Code.        Packet Page. 30 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. B-1 BBK – February 2023 October 2024 PART “B" DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES The disclosure categories listed below identify the types of economic interests that the designated position must disclose for each disclosure category to which the designated is assigned.3 “Investment” means financial interest in any business entity (including a consulting business or other independent contracting business) and are reportable if they are either located in, doing business in, planning to do business in, or have done business during the previous two years in the jurisdiction of the City. Category 1: All investments and business positions and sources of income, including gifts loans and travel payments, that are located in, do business in, or own real property within the jurisdiction of the City. Category 2: All interests in real property which is located in whole or in part within, or not more than two (2) miles outside, the boundaries of the City, including any leasehold, beneficial or ownership interest or option to acquire property. Category 3: All investments and business positions in, business entities, and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, that are engaged in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property within the jurisdiction of the City. Category 4: All investments, business positions and income from business entities and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, that provide services, products, materials, machinery, vehicles or equipment of a type purchased or leased by the City. Category 5: All investments, business positions and income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, that provide services, products, materials, machinery, vehicles or equipment of a type purchased or leased by the designated position’s department, unit or division. Category 6: All investment and business positions in business entities and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, subject to the regulatory, permit, licensing authority of the designated employee’s department, unit or division. 3 This Conflict of Interest Code does not require the reporting of gifts from outside this agency’s jurisdiction if the source does not have some connection with or bearing upon the functions or duties of the position. (Reg. 18730.1)        Packet Page. 31 55600.00100\42657175.2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. B-2 BBK – February 2023 October 2024 Category 7: All investments and business positions in business entities, and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, or income from a nonprofit organization, if the source is of the type to receive grants or other monies from or through the City or its subdivisions. Category 8: All investments and business positions in business entities, and sources of income, including gifts, loans, and travel payments, if such entities or sources have filed claims against the agency in the past 2 years, or have a claim pending before the agency.        Packet Page. 32 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP BBK – October 2024 CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO        Packet Page. 33 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO (Amended November 6, 2024) The Political Reform Act (Gov. Code § 81000, et seq.) requires state and local government agencies to adopt and promulgate conflict of interest codes. The Fair Political Practices Commission has adopted a regulation, (tit. 2 Cal. Code of Regs, § 18730), that contains the terms of a standard conflict of interest code which can be incorporated by reference in an agency’s code. After public notice and hearing, Regulation 18730 may be amended by the Fair Political Practices Commission to conform to amendments in the Political Reform Act. Therefore, the terms of 2 California Code of Regulations section 18730 and any amendments to it duly adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission are hereby incorporated by reference. This incorporation page, Regulation 18730 and the attached Appendix designating positions and establishing disclosure categories, shall constitute the Conflict of Interest Code of the City of San Bernardino (“City"). The Mayor, Members of the City Council and Planning Commission, the City Manager, the City Attorney and the City Treasurer, shall electronically file their annual statements of economic interests directly with the Fair Political Practices Commission. All other officials and designated positions required to submit a statement of economic interests shall file their statements with the City Clerk as the City’s Filing Officer. All officials and designated positions required to submit a statement of economic Interests shall file their statements with the City Clerk as the Town’s Filing Officer. The City Clerk shall make and retain a copy of all statements filed by the Mayor, members of the City Council, the City Manager, the City Attorney and the City Treasurer, and forward the originals of these statements to the Fair Political Practices Commission. The City Clerk shall retain the original statements filed by all other officials and designated positions and will make all retained statements available for public inspection and reproduction during regular business hours. (Gov. Code § 81008)        Packet Page. 34 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-1 BBK – October 2024 APPENDIX CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO (Amended November 6, 2024) PART “A” The Mayor, Members of the City Council and Planning Commission, the City Manager, the City Attorney, the City Treasurer, and all Other City Officials who manage public investments as defined by 2 Cal. Code of Regs. § 18700.3(b), are NOT subject to the City’s Code but must file disclosure statements under Government Code Section 87200 et seq. [Regs. § 18730(b)(3)] OFFICIALS WHO MANAGE PUBLIC INVESTMENTS It has been determined that the positions listed below are Other City Officials who manage public investments.1 These positions are listed here for informational purposes only. Investment Consultants 1 Individuals holding one of the above-listed positions may contact the Fair Political Practices Commission for assistance or written advice regarding their filing obligations if they believe that their position has been categorized incorrectly. The Fair Political Practices Commission makes the final determination whether a position is covered by § 87200.        Packet Page. 35 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-2 BBK – October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS GOVERNED BY THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE Accountant III 5 Accounting Division Manager 5 Administrative Analyst (ALL) 5 Administrative Division Manager 5 Administrative Services Supervisor 5 Administrative Supervisor and Executive Assistant to the City Manager 5 Animal Services Manager 5 Animal Services Supervisor 5 Aquatics Supervisor 5 Assistant Building Official 3, 5, 6 Assistant Buyer 5 Assistant Chief of Police 5 Assistant City Manager 1, 2 Assistant Planner 3, 5, 6 Assistant to the City Manager 5 Assistant to the Mayor 5 Assistant to the Mayor III 5 Associate Planner 3, 5, 6 Auditor (ALL) 5 Budget Division Manager 4 Budget Officer 4 Building Inspector (ALL) 3, 5, 6 Building Maintenance Division Manager 3, 5 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED        Packet Page. 36 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-3 BBK – October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Building Official 3, 5, 6 Business Registration Manager 5, 6 Buyer 4 Capital Improvement Project Manager 2, 3, 5, 7 CATV Broadcast Engineering Coordinator 5 Chief Assistant City Attorney 1, 2 Chief Building Official and Safety Division Manager 3, 5, 6 Chief Deputy City Clerk 1, 2 Chief of Police 5 Chief of Staff 5 City Clerk 5 City Engineer 1, 2 City Planner 1, 2 Civil Engineering Division Manager 1, 2 Code Enforcement Division Manager 5 Code Enforcement Officer (ALL) 5 Community Development Block Grant (CBDG) Coordinator 5, 7 Community Intervention Program Manager 5, 7 Community Policing Specialist 5 Community Recreation Center Supervisor 5 Community Recreation Manager 5 Community Recreation Program Coordinator 5 Community Recreation Program Supervisor (Soccer) 5 Community Relations Supervisor Assistant to the City Manager 5 Community Services Center Supervisor 5 Community Services Officer Supervisor 5 Community Services Program Coordinator 5 Construction Inspector (ALL) 3, 6 Construction/Survey Manager 2, 5        Packet Page. 37 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-4 BBK – October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Council Administrative Supervisor 5 Custodial Supervisor 5 Deputy City Attorney (ALL) 1, 2 Deputy City Clerk I 5 Deputy City Clerk II 5 Deputy City Manager 1, 2 Deputy Director City Engineer 1, 2 Deputy Director of Animal Services 5 Deputy Director of Economic Development 1, 2 Deputy Director of Finance and Management Services 4 Deputy Director of Housing and Homelessness 5, 7 Deputy Director of Human Resources and Risk Management 5 Deputy Director of Information Technology 5 Deputy Director of Operations 5 Deputy Director of Parks, Recreation & Community 1, 2 Deputy Director of Public Works-City Engineer 1, 2 Deputy Engineer 1, 2 Deputy General Manager 1, 2 Deputy Library Director 5 Development Services Technician 5 Director of Animal Services 5 Director of Community & Economic Development 1, 2 Director of Community Development and Housing 1, 2 Director of Economic Development 1, 2 Director of Finance 4 Director of Finance and Management Services 4 Director of Human Resources 5 Director of IT 5 Director of Parks, Recreation & Community Services 1, 2        Packet Page. 38 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-5 BBK – October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Director of Public Works 1, 2 Director of Public Works, Operations and Maintenance 1, 2 Director, Water Reclamation 3, 5, 6 Director, Water Utility 3, 5, 6 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Specialist 5 Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion Officer 5 Economic Development Division Manager 1, 2 Economic Development Manager 5 Economic Development Project Manager 1, 2 Electrical, Instrumentation, and SCADA Superintendent 5 Emergency Operations Manager 5 Engineering Assistant (ALL) 2, 3, 6 Engineering Associate 2, 5 Engineering Manager 2, 3, 5 Engineering Project Manager 2, 3, 5 Engineering Technician 5, 6 Environmental Programs Coordinator 2, 5 Environmental Control Supervisor 2, 5 Equipment Maintenance Manager 5 Equipment Maintenance Supervisor 5 Executive Staff Assistant to the City Council 5 Facilities & Fleet Maintenance Division Manager 5 Facilities Maintenance Supervisor 5 Financial Analyst 5 Fleet Parts Storekeeper 5 Fleet/Warehouse Supervisor 4 Forensic Supervisor 5 Forestry Supervisor 5 General Manager – Water 1, 2        Packet Page. 39 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-6 BBK – October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED GIS Administrator 5 Grant Analyst 5, 7 Grant Division Manager 5, 7 Grant Manager 5, 7 Grants Assistant 5, 7 Homeless Services Coordinator 5, 7 Homeless Solutions Manager 5, 7 Housing Compliance Officer 5 Housing Division Manager 5, 7 Housing Manager 1, 2 HR Analyst (ALL) 5 Human Resources Division Manager 5 Human Resources Generalist 5 HVAC Supervisor 5 IEMG Broadcast Engineering Coordinator 5 Information Technology Manager 5 Information Technology Manager 5 Information Technology Operations Supervisor 5 IT Operations Supervisor 5 Land Development Engineer 2, 3 ,5 Landscape and Irrigation Inspector (ALL) 3, 5 Landscape Inspector (ALL) 3, 5 Landscape Maintenance District Supervisor 3, 5 Lead Building Inspector 3, 5 Lead Code Enforcement Officer 5 Legislative & Governmental Affairs Manager 5 Library Administrative Supervisor 5 Library Circulation Supervisor 5 Library Director 5        Packet Page. 40 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-7 BBK – October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Library IT Manager 5 Library Network Administrator 5 Library Program Coordinator 5 Maintenance Supervisor 5 Management Analyst II 5, 7 Manager of Communications 5 Marketing and Public Relations Specialist 5 Neighborhood & Customer Service Manager 5 Network Systems Administrator 5 NPDES Inspector II 3, 5, 6 NPDES Manager 3, 5, 6 Operations & Maintenance Division Manager 2, 5 Parks and Landscape Maintenance Supervisor 5 Parks and Landscape Supervisor 5 Parks Construction Lead Worker 5 Parks Maintenance Division Manager 5 Parks Ranger Supervisor 5 Parks Superintendent 3, 5 Permit Services Supervisor 5, 6 Planning Division Manager 2, 3, 5, 6 Plans Examiner (ALL) 2, 3, 5, 6 Police Captain 5 Police Dispatch Manager 5 Police Dispatch Supervisor 5 Police Lieutenant 5 Principal Civil Engineer 2, 3, 5, 6 Principal Engineer, Public Works Dept. 2, 5 Principal Engineer, Water Dept. 2, 3, 5 Principal Planner 2, 3, 5, 6        Packet Page. 41 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-8 BBK – October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Project Manager 2, 3, 5 Project Manager of Community Development Programs 5 Project Manager of Housing Programs 3, 5 Public Information Officer 5 Public Safety and Training Officer 5 Public Safety IT Manager 5 Public Works Inspector III 3, 5 Purchasing Division Manager 5 Rangemaster 5 Real Property Manager 1, 2 Real Property Specialist 1, 2 Recreation Therapist 5 Retired & Senior Volunteer Program Manager 5 Risk Division Manager 5, 8 Senior Civil Engineer 2, 3, 5, 6 Senior Civil Engineer/Division Manager 2, 3, 5, 6 Senior Code Enforcement Officer 5 Senior Companion Program Manager 5 Senior GIS Analyst 5 Senior HR/Risk Analyst 5 Senior Human Resources Technician 5 Senior IT Analyst 5 Senior Librarian 5 Senior Management Analyst 5 Senior Network Administrator 5 Senior Network Specialist 5 Senior Network System Administrator 5 Senior Nutrition Food Services Supervisor 5 Senior Planner 2, 3, 5        Packet Page. 42 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. A-9 BBK – October 2024 DESIGNATED POSITIONS’ TITLE OR FUNCTION DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ASSIGNED Senior Plans Examiner 2, 3, 5, 6 Station Manager 5 Street Signal/Lighting Supervisor 5 Supervising Human Resources Analyst 5 Technology Librarian 5 Traffic Engineer 2, 3, 5 Traffic Engineering Associate 2, 3, 5 Traffic Operations Systems Analyst 2, 3, 5 Traffic Signal and Lighting Supervisor 3, 5 Treasury Manager 5 Treasury Supervisor 1, 2 Water Quality Control Officer 5 Water Reclamation Maintenance Superintendent 5 Water Reclamation Operations Superintendent 5 Water Utility Distribution Superintendent 5 Water Utility Operations Superintendent 5 DESIGNATED BOARDS/COMMITTEES/COMMISSIONS Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino 1, 2 Board of Building Commissioners/ Building Appeals Board 1, 2 Personnel Commission 1, 2 Board of Library Trustees 1, 2 Board of Water Commissioners 1, 2 Consultants and New Positions2 2 Individuals serving as a consultant as defined in FPPC Reg. 18700.3(a) or in a new position must file under the broadest disclosure category set forth in this Code subject to the following limitation: The City Manager may determine that, due to the range of duties or contractual obligations, it is more appropriate to designate a limited disclosure requirement. A clear explanation of the duties and a statement of the extent of the disclosure requirements must be in a written document. The City Manager’s determination is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this Conflict of Interest Code.        Packet Page. 43 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. B-1 BBK – October 2024 PART “B" DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES The disclosure categories listed below identify the types of economic interests that the designated position must disclose for each disclosure category to which the designated is assigned.3 “Investment” means financial interest in any business entity (including a consulting business or other independent contracting business) and are reportable if they are either located in, doing business in, planning to do business in, or have done business during the previous two years in the jurisdiction of the City. Category 1: All investments and business positions and sources of income, including gifts loans and travel payments, that are located in, do business in, or own real property within the jurisdiction of the City. Category 2: All interests in real property which is located in whole or in part within, or not more than two (2) miles outside, the boundaries of the City, including any leasehold, beneficial or ownership interest or option to acquire property. Category 3: All investments and business positions in, business entities, and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, that are engaged in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property within the jurisdiction of the City. Category 4: All investments, business positions and income from business entities and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, that provide services, products, materials, machinery, vehicles or equipment of a type purchased or leased by the City. Category 5: All investments, business positions and income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, that provide services, products, materials, machinery, vehicles or equipment of a type purchased or leased by the designated position’s department, unit or division. Category 6: All investment and business positions in business entities and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, subject to the regulatory, permit, licensing authority of the designated employee’s department, unit or division. Category 7: All investments and business positions in business entities, and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, or income from a nonprofit organization, if the source is of the type to receive grants or other monies from or through the City or its subdivisions. 3 This Conflict of Interest Code does not require the reporting of gifts from outside this agency’s jurisdiction if the source does not have some connection with or bearing upon the functions or duties of the position. (Reg. 18730.1)        Packet Page. 44 55600.00100\42657175.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP App. B-2 BBK – October 2024 Category 8: All investments and business positions in business entities, and sources of income, including gifts, loans, and travel payments, if such entities or sources have filed claims against the agency in the past 2 years, or have a claim pending before the agency.        Packet Page. 45 55600.00100\42816037.1 NOTICE OF INTENTION TO AMEND THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of San Bernardino intends to amend its Conflict of Interest Code (the “Code”) pursuant to Government Code section 87306. The Appendix of the Code designates those employees, members, officers, and consultants who make or participate in the making of decisions and are subject to the disclosure requirements of the City’s Code. The City’s proposed amendment adds new positions that must be designated, revises titles to existing positions, and revise disclosure categories. The proposed amended Code will be considered by the City Council on November 6, 2024, at 5:00 p.m. at the City of San Bernardino, 290 North D Street, San Bernardino, California. Any interested person may be present and comment at the public meeting or may submit written comments concerning the proposed amendment. Any comments or inquiries should be directed to the attention of Genoveva Rocha, City Clerk, City of San Bernardino, 290 North D Street, San Bernardino, CA 92401; (909) 384-5208; publiccomments@sbcity.org. Written comments must be submitted no later than November 6, 2024, at 5:00 p.m. The proposed amended Code may be reviewed at, and copies obtained from, the office of the City Clerk.        Packet Page. 46 1 (Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, Title 2, Division 6, California Code of Regulations) § 18730. Provisions of Conflict of Interest Codes. (a) Incorporation by reference of the terms of this regulation along with the designation of employees and the formulation of disclosure categories in the Appendix referred to below constitute the adoption and promulgation of a conflict of interest code within the meaning of Section 87300 or the amendment of a conflict of interest code within the meaning of Section 87306 if the terms of this regulation are substituted for terms of a conflict of interest code already in effect. A code so amended or adopted and promulgated requires the reporting of reportable items in a manner substantially equivalent to the requirements of article 2 of chapter 7 of the Political Reform Act, Sections 81000, et seq. The requirements of a conflict of interest code are in addition to other requirements of the Political Reform Act, such as the general prohibition against conflicts of interest contained in Section 87100, and to other state or local laws pertaining to conflicts of interest. (b) The terms of a conflict of interest code amended or adopted and promulgated pursuant to this regulation are as follows: (1) Section 1. Definitions. The definitions contained in the Political Reform Act of 1974, regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission (Regulations 18110, et seq. ), and any amendments to the Act or regulations, are incorporated by reference into this conflict of interest code. (2) Section 2. Designated Employees.        Packet Page. 47 2 The persons holding positions listed in the Appendix are designated employees. It has been determined that these persons make or participate in the making of decisions which may foreseeably have a material effect on economic interests. (3) Section 3. Disclosure Categories. This code does not establish any disclosure obligation for those designated employees who are also specified in Section 87200 if they are designated in this code in that same capacity or if the geographical jurisdiction of this agency is the same as or is wholly included within the jurisdiction in which those persons must report their economic interests pursuant to article 2 of chapter 7 of the Political Reform Act, Sections 87200, et seq. In addition, this code does not establish any disclosure obligation for any designated employees who are designated in a conflict of interest code for another agency, if all of the following apply: (A) The geographical jurisdiction of this agency is the same as or is wholly included within the jurisdiction of the other agency; (B) The disclosure assigned in the code of the other agency is the same as that required under article 2 of chapter 7 of the Political Reform Act, Section 87200; and (C) The filing officer is the same for both agencies.1 Such persons are covered by this code for disqualification purposes only. With respect to all other designated employees, the disclosure categories set forth in the Appendix specify which kinds of economic interests are reportable. Such a designated employee shall disclose in the employee's statement of economic interests those economic interests the employee has which are of the kind described in the disclosure categories to which the employee is assigned in the Appendix. It has been determined that the economic interests set forth in a designated employee's        Packet Page. 48 3 disclosure categories are the kinds of economic interests which the employee foreseeably can affect materially through the conduct of the employee's office. (4) Section 4. Statements of Economic Interests: Place of Filing. The code reviewing body shall instruct all designated employees within its code to file statements of economic interests with the agency or with the code reviewing body, as provided by the code reviewing body in the agency's conflict of interest code.2 (5) Section 5. Statements of Economic Interests: Time of Filing. (A) Initial Statements. All designated employees employed by the agency on the effective date of this code, as originally adopted, promulgated and approved by the code reviewing body, shall file statements within 30 days after the effective date of this code. Thereafter, each person already in a position when it is designated by an amendment to this code shall file an initial statement within 30 days after the effective date of the amendment. (B) Assuming Office Statements. All persons assuming designated positions after the effective date of this code shall file statements within 30 days after assuming the designated positions, or if subject to State Senate confirmation, 30 days after being nominated or appointed. (C) Annual Statements. All designated employees shall file statements no later than April 1. If a person reports for military service as defined in the Servicemember's Civil Relief Act, the deadline for the annual statement of economic interests is 30 days following the person's return to office, provided the person, or someone authorized to represent the person's interests, notifies the filing officer in writing prior to the applicable filing deadline that the person is subject to that federal statute and is unable to meet the applicable deadline, and provides the filing officer verification of the person's military status.        Packet Page. 49 4 (D) Leaving Office Statements. All persons who leave designated positions shall file statements within 30 days after leaving office. (5.5) Section 5.5. Statements for Persons Who Resign Prior to Assuming Office. Any person who resigns within 12 months of initial appointment, or within 30 days of the date of notice provided by the filing officer to file an assuming office statement, is not deemed to have assumed office or left office, provided the person did not make or participate in the making of, or use the person's position to influence any decision and did not receive or become entitled to receive any form of payment as a result of the person's appointment. Such persons shall not file either an assuming or leaving office statement. (A) Any person who resigns a position within 30 days of the date of a notice from the filing officer shall do both of the following: (1) File a written resignation with the appointing power; and (2) File a written statement with the filing officer declaring under penalty of perjury that during the period between appointment and resignation the person did not make, participate in the making, or use the position to influence any decision of the agency or receive, or become entitled to receive, any form of payment by virtue of being appointed to the position. (6) Section 6. Contents of and Period Covered by Statements of Economic Interests. (A) Contents of Initial Statements. Initial statements shall disclose any reportable investments, interests in real property and business positions held on the effective date of the code and income received during the 12 months prior to the effective date of the code. (B) Contents of Assuming Office Statements.        Packet Page. 50 5 Assuming office statements shall disclose any reportable investments, interests in real property and business positions held on the date of assuming office or, if subject to State Senate confirmation or appointment, on the date of nomination, and income received during the 12 months prior to the date of assuming office or the date of being appointed or nominated, respectively. (C) Contents of Annual Statements. Annual statements shall disclose any reportable investments, interests in real property, income and business positions held or received during the previous calendar year provided, however, that the period covered by an employee's first annual statement shall begin on the effective date of the code or the date of assuming office whichever is later, or for a board or commission member subject to Section 87302.6, the day after the closing date of the most recent statement filed by the member pursuant to Regulation 18754. (D) Contents of Leaving Office Statements. Leaving office statements shall disclose reportable investments, interests in real property, income and business positions held or received during the period between the closing date of the last statement filed and the date of leaving office. (7) Section 7. Manner of Reporting. Statements of economic interests shall be made on forms prescribed by the Fair Political Practices Commission and supplied by the agency, and shall contain the following information: (A) Investment and Real Property Disclosure. When an investment or an interest in real property3 is required to be reported,4 the statement shall contain the following: 1. A statement of the nature of the investment or interest;        Packet Page. 51 6 2. The name of the business entity in which each investment is held, and a general description of the business activity in which the business entity is engaged; 3. The address or other precise location of the real property; 4. A statement whether the fair market value of the investment or interest in real property equals or exceeds $2,000, exceeds $10,000, exceeds $100,000, or exceeds $1,000,000. (B) Personal Income Disclosure. When personal income is required to be reported,5 the statement shall contain: 1. The name and address of each source of income aggregating $500 or more in value, or $50 or more in value if the income was a gift, and a general description of the business activity, if any, of each source; 2. A statement whether the aggregate value of income from each source, or in the case of a loan, the highest amount owed to each source, was $1,000 or less, greater than $1,000, greater than $10,000, or greater than $100,000; 3. A description of the consideration, if any, for which the income was received; 4. In the case of a gift, the name, address and business activity of the donor and any intermediary through which the gift was made; a description of the gift; the amount or value of the gift; and the date on which the gift was received; 5. In the case of a loan, the annual interest rate and the security, if any, given for the loan and the term of the loan. (C) Business Entity Income Disclosure. When income of a business entity, including income of a sole proprietorship, is required to be reported,6 the statement shall contain: 1. The name, address, and a general description of the business activity of the business entity;        Packet Page. 52 7 2. The name of every person from whom the business entity received payments if the filer's pro rata share of gross receipts from such person was equal to or greater than $10,000. (D) Business Position Disclosure. When business positions are required to be reported, a designated employee shall list the name and address of each business entity in which the employee is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or in which the employee holds any position of management, a description of the business activity in which the business entity is engaged, and the designated employee's position with the business entity. (E) Acquisition or Disposal During Reporting Period. In the case of an annual or leaving office statement, if an investment or an interest in real property was partially or wholly acquired or disposed of during the period covered by the statement, the statement shall contain the date of acquisition or disposal. (8) Section 8. Prohibition on Receipt of Honoraria. (A) No member of a state board or commission, and no designated employee of a state or local government agency, shall accept any honorarium from any source, if the member or employee would be required to report the receipt of income or gifts from that source on the member's or employee's statement of economic interests. (B) This section shall not apply to any part-time member of the governing board of any public institution of higher education, unless the member is also an elected official. (C) Subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) of Section 89501 shall apply to the prohibitions in this section. (D) This section shall not limit or prohibit payments, advances, or reimbursements for travel and related lodging and subsistence authorized by Section 89506. (8.1) Section 8.1. Prohibition on Receipt of Gifts in Excess of $520.        Packet Page. 53 8 (A) No member of a state board or commission, and no designated employee of a state or local government agency, shall accept gifts with a total value of more than $520 in a calendar year from any single source, if the member or employee would be required to report the receipt of income or gifts from that source on the member's or employee's statement of economic interests. (B) This section shall not apply to any part-time member of the governing board of any public institution of higher education, unless the member is also an elected official. (C) Subdivisions (e), (f), and (g) of Section 89503 shall apply to the prohibitions in this section. (8.2) Section 8.2. Loans to Public Officials. (A) No elected officer of a state or local government agency shall, from the date of the election to office through the date that the officer vacates office, receive a personal loan from any officer, employee, member, or consultant of the state or local government agency in which the elected officer holds office or over which the elected officer's agency has direction and control. (B) No public official who is exempt from the state civil service system pursuant to subdivisions (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g) of Section 4 of Article VII of the Constitution shall, while he or she holds office, receive a personal loan from any officer, employee, member, or consultant of the state or local government agency in which the public official holds office or over which the public official's agency has direction and control. This subdivision shall not apply to loans made to a public official whose duties are solely secretarial, clerical, or manual. (C) No elected officer of a state or local government agency shall, from the date of the election to office through the date that the officer vacates office, receive a personal loan from        Packet Page. 54 9 any person who has a contract with the state or local government agency to which that elected officer has been elected or over which that elected officer's agency has direction and control. This subdivision shall not apply to loans made by banks or other financial institutions or to any indebtedness created as part of a retail installment or credit card transaction, if the loan is made or the indebtedness created in the lender's regular course of business on terms available to members of the public without regard to the elected officer's official status. (D) No public official who is exempt from the state civil service system pursuant to subdivisions (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g) of Section 4 of Article VII of the Constitution shall, while the official holds office, receive a personal loan from any person who has a contract with the state or local government agency to which that elected officer has been elected or over which that elected officer's agency has direction and control. This subdivision shall not apply to loans made by banks or other financial institutions or to any indebtedness created as part of a retail installment or credit card transaction, if the loan is made or the indebtedness created in the lender's regular course of business on terms available to members of the public without regard to the elected officer's official status. This subdivision shall not apply to loans made to a public official whose duties are solely secretarial, clerical, or manual. (E) This section shall not apply to the following: 1. Loans made to the campaign committee of an elected officer or candidate for elective office. 2. Loans made by a public official's spouse, child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, parent-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, nephew, niece, aunt, uncle, or first cousin, or the spouse of any such persons, provided that the person making the loan is not acting as an agent or intermediary for any person not otherwise exempted under this section.        Packet Page. 55 10 3. Loans from a person which, in the aggregate, do not exceed $500 at any given time. 4. Loans made, or offered in writing, before January 1, 1998. (8.3) Section 8.3. Loan Terms. (A) Except as set forth in subdivision (B), no elected officer of a state or local government agency shall, from the date of the officer's election to office through the date the officer vacates office, receive a personal loan of $500 or more, except when the loan is in writing and clearly states the terms of the loan, including the parties to the loan agreement, date of the loan, amount of the loan, term of the loan, date or dates when payments shall be due on the loan and the amount of the payments, and the rate of interest paid on the loan. (B) This section shall not apply to the following types of loans: 1. Loans made to the campaign committee of the elected officer. 2. Loans made to the elected officer by his or her spouse, child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, parent-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, nephew, niece, aunt, uncle, or first cousin, or the spouse of any such person, provided that the person making the loan is not acting as an agent or intermediary for any person not otherwise exempted under this section. 3. Loans made, or offered in writing, before January 1, 1998. (C) Nothing in this section shall exempt any person from any other provision of Title 9 of the Government Code. (8.4) Section 8.4. Personal Loans. (A) Except as set forth in subdivision (B), a personal loan received by any designated employee shall become a gift to the designated employee for the purposes of this section in the following circumstances:        Packet Page. 56 11 1. If the loan has a defined date or dates for repayment, when the statute of limitations for filing an action for default has expired. 2. If the loan has no defined date or dates for repayment, when one year has elapsed from the later of the following: a. The date the loan was made. b. The date the last payment of $100 or more was made on the loan. c. The date upon which the debtor has made payments on the loan aggregating to less than $250 during the previous 12 months. (B) This section shall not apply to the following types of loans: 1. A loan made to the campaign committee of an elected officer or a candidate for elective office. 2. A loan that would otherwise not be a gift as defined in this title. 3. A loan that would otherwise be a gift as set forth under subdivision (A), but on which the creditor has taken reasonable action to collect the balance due. 4. A loan that would otherwise be a gift as set forth under subdivision (A), but on which the creditor, based on reasonable business considerations, has not undertaken collection action. Except in a criminal action, a creditor who claims that a loan is not a gift on the basis of this paragraph has the burden of proving that the decision for not taking collection action was based on reasonable business considerations. 5. A loan made to a debtor who has filed for bankruptcy and the loan is ultimately discharged in bankruptcy. (C) Nothing in this section shall exempt any person from any other provisions of Title 9 of the Government Code.        Packet Page. 57 12 (9) Section 9. Disqualification. No designated employee shall make, participate in making, or in any way attempt to use the employee's official position to influence the making of any governmental decision which the employee knows or has reason to know will have a reasonably foreseeable material financial effect, distinguishable from its effect on the public generally, on the official or a member of the official's immediate family or on: (A) Any business entity in which the designated employee has a direct or indirect investment worth $2,000 or more; (B) Any real property in which the designated employee has a direct or indirect interest worth $2,000 or more; (C) Any source of income, other than gifts and other than loans by a commercial lending institution in the regular course of business on terms available to the public without regard to official status, aggregating $500 or more in value provided to, received by or promised to the designated employee within 12 months prior to the time when the decision is made; (D) Any business entity in which the designated employee is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or holds any position of management; or (E) Any donor of, or any intermediary or agent for a donor of, a gift or gifts aggregating $500 or more provided to, received by, or promised to the designated employee within 12 months prior to the time when the decision is made. (9.3) Section 9.3. Legally Required Participation. No designated employee shall be prevented from making or participating in the making of any decision to the extent the employee's participation is legally required for the decision to be made.        Packet Page. 58 13 The fact that the vote of a designated employee who is on a voting body is needed to break a tie does not make the employees' participation legally required for purposes of this section. (9.5) Section 9.5. Disqualification of State Officers and Employees. In addition to the general disqualification provisions of section 9, no state administrative official shall make, participate in making, or use the official's position to influence any governmental decision directly relating to any contract where the state administrative official knows or has reason to know that any party to the contract is a person with whom the state administrative official, or any member of the official's immediate family has, within 12 months prior to the time when the official action is to be taken: (A) Engaged in a business transaction or transactions on terms not available to members of the public, regarding any investment or interest in real property; or (B) Engaged in a business transaction or transactions on terms not available to members of the public regarding the rendering of goods or services totaling in value $1,000 or more. (10) Section 10. Disclosure of Disqualifying Interest. When a designated employee determines that the employee should not make a governmental decision because the employee has a disqualifying interest in it, the determination not to act may be accompanied by disclosure of the disqualifying interest. (11) Section 11. Assistance of the Commission and Counsel. Any designated employee who is unsure of the duties under this code may request assistance from the Fair Political Practices Commission pursuant to Section 83114 and Regulations 18329 and 18329.5 or from the attorney for the employee's agency, provided that nothing in this section requires the attorney for the agency to issue any formal or informal opinion. (12) Section 12. Violations.        Packet Page. 59 14 This code has the force and effect of law. Designated employees violating any provision of this code are subject to the administrative, criminal and civil sanctions provided in the Political Reform Act, Sections 81000-91014. In addition, a decision in relation to which a violation of the disqualification provisions of this code or of Section 87100 or 87450 has occurred may be set aside as void pursuant to Section 91003. ____________________ 1 Designated employees who are required to file statements of economic interests under any other agency's conflict of interest code, or under article 2 for a different jurisdiction, may expand their statement of economic interests to cover reportable interests in both jurisdictions, and file copies of this expanded statement with both entities in lieu of filing separate and distinct statements, provided that each copy of such expanded statement filed in place of an original is signed and verified by the designated employee as if it were an original. See Section 81004. 2 See Section 81010 and Regulation 18115 for the duties of filing officers and persons in agencies who make and retain copies of statements and forward the originals to the filing officer. 3 For the purpose of disclosure only (not disqualification), an interest in real property does not include the principal residence of the filer. 4 Investments and interests in real property which have a fair market value of less than $2,000 are not investments and interests in real property within the meaning of the Political Reform Act. However, investments or interests in real property of an individual include those held by the individual's spouse and dependent children as well as a pro rata share of any investment or interest in real property of any business entity or trust in which the individual, spouse and dependent children own, in the aggregate, a direct, indirect or beneficial interest of 10 percent or greater.        Packet Page. 60 15 5 A designated employee's income includes the employee's community property interest in the income of the employee's spouse but does not include salary or reimbursement for expenses received from a state, local or federal government agency. 6 Income of a business entity is reportable if the direct, indirect or beneficial interest of the filer and the filer's spouse in the business entity aggregates a 10 percent or greater interest. In addition, the disclosure of persons who are clients or customers of a business entity is required only if the clients or customers are within one of the disclosure categories of the filer. Note: Authority cited: Section 83112, Government Code. Reference: Sections 87103(e), 87300- 87302, 89501, 89502 and 89503, Government Code. HISTORY 1. New section filed 4-2-80 as an emergency; effective upon filing (Register 80, No. 14). Certificate of Compliance included. 2. Editorial correction (Register 80, No. 29). 3. Amendment of subsection (b) filed 1-9-81; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 81, No. 2). 4. Amendment of subsection (b)(7)(B)1. filed 1-26-83; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 83, No. 5). 5. Amendment of subsection (b)(7)(A) filed 11-10-83; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 83, No. 46). 6. Amendment filed 4-13-87; operative 5-13-87 (Register 87, No. 16). 7. Amendment of subsection (b) filed 10-21-88; operative 11-20-88 (Register 88, No. 46). 8. Amendment of subsections (b)(8)(A) and (b)(8)(B) and numerous editorial changes filed 8-28- 90; operative 9-27-90 (Reg. 90, No. 42).        Packet Page. 61 16 9. Amendment of subsections (b)(3), (b)(8) and renumbering of following subsections and amendment of Note filed 8-7-92; operative 9-7-92 (Register 92, No. 32). 10. Amendment of subsection (b)(5.5) and new subsections (b)(5.5)(A)-(A)(2) filed 2-4-93; operative 2-4-93 (Register 93, No. 6). 11. Change without regulatory effect adopting Conflict of Interest Code for California Mental Health Planning Council filed 11-22-93 pursuant to title 1, section 100, California Code of Regulations (Register 93, No. 48). Approved by Fair Political Practices Commission 9-21-93. 12. Change without regulatory effect redesignating Conflict of Interest Code for California Mental Health Planning Council as chapter 62, section 55100 filed 1-4-94 pursuant to title 1, section 100, California Code of Regulations (Register 94, No. 1). 13. Editorial correction adding History 11 and 12 and deleting duplicate section number (Register 94, No. 17). 14. Amendment of subsection (b)(8), designation of subsection (b)(8)(A), new subsection (b)(8)(B), and amendment of subsections (b)(8.1)-(b)(8.1)(B), (b)(9)(E) and Note filed 3-14-95; operative 3-14-95 pursuant to Government Code section 11343.4(d) (Register 95, No. 11). 15. Editorial correction inserting inadvertently omitted language in footnote 4 (Register 96, No. 13). 16. Amendment of subsections (b)(8)(A)-(B) and (b)(8.1)(A), repealer of subsection (b)(8.1)(B), and amendment of subsection (b)(12) filed 10-23-96; operative 10-23-96 pursuant to Government Code section 11343.4(d) (Register 96, No. 43). 17. Amendment of subsections (b)(8.1) and (9)(E) filed 4-9-97; operative 4-9-97 pursuant to Government Code section 11343.4(d) (Register 97, No. 15).        Packet Page. 62 17 18. Amendment of subsections (b)(7)(B)5., new subsections (b)(8.2)-(b)(8.4)(C) and amendment of Note filed 8-24-98; operative 8-24-98 pursuant to Government Code section 11343.4(d) (Register 98, No. 35). 19. Editorial correction of subsection (a) (Register 98, No. 47). 20. Amendment of subsections (b)(8.1), (b)(8.1)(A) and (b)(9)(E) filed 5-11-99; operative 5-11- 99 pursuant to Government Code section 11343.4(d) (Register 99, No. 20). 21. Amendment of subsections (b)(8.1)-(b)(8.1)(A) and (b)(9)(E) filed 12-6-2000; operative 1-1- 2001 pursuant to the 1974 version of Government Code section 11380.2 and Title 2, California Code of Regulations, section 18312(d) and (e) (Register 2000, No. 49). 22. Amendment of subsections (b)(3) and (b)(10) filed 1-10-2001; operative 2-1-2001. Submitted to OAL for filing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements) (Register 2001, No. 2). 23. Amendment of subsections (b)(7)(A)4., (b)(7)(B)1.-2., (b)(8.2)(E)3., (b)(9)(A)-(C) and footnote 4. filed 2-13-2001. Submitted to OAL for filing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements) (Register 2001, No. 7). 24. Amendment of subsections (b)(8.1)-(b)(8.1)(A) filed 1-16-2003; operative 1-1-2003. Submitted to OAL for filing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District,        Packet Page. 63 18 nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements) (Register 2003, No. 3). 25. Editorial correction of History 24 (Register 2003, No. 12). 26. Editorial correction removing extraneous phrase in subsection (b)(9.5)(B) (Register 2004, No. 33). 27. Amendment of subsections (b)(2)-(3), (b)(3)(C), (b)(6)(C), (b)(8.1)-(b)(8.1)(A), (b)(9)(E) and (b)(11)-(12) filed 1-4-2005; operative 1-1-2005 pursuant to Government Code section 11343.4 (Register 2005, No. 1). 28. Amendment of subsection (b)(7)(A)4. filed 10-11-2005; operative 11-10-2005 (Register 2005, No. 41). 29. Amendment of subsections (a), (b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(8.1), (b)(8.1)(A) and (b)(9)(E) filed 12-18- 2006; operative 1-1-2007. Submitted to OAL pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements) (Register 2006, No. 51). 30. Amendment of subsections (b)(8.1)-(b)(8.1)(A) and (b)(9)(E) filed 10-31-2008; operative 11- 30-2008. Submitted to OAL for filing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements and not subject to procedural or substantive review by OAL) (Register 2008, No. 44). 31. Amendment of section heading and section filed 11-15-2010; operative 12-15-2010. Submitted to OAL for filing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of        Packet Page. 64 19 Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements and not subject to procedural or substantive review by OAL) (Register 2010, No. 47). 32. Amendment of section heading and subsections (a)-(b)(1), (b)(3)-(4), (b)(5)(C), (b)(8.1)- (b)(8.1)(A) and (b)(9)(E) and amendment of footnote 1 filed 1-8-2013; operative 2-7-2013. Submitted to OAL for filing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements and not subject to procedural or substantive review by OAL) (Register 2013, No. 2). 33. Amendment of subsections (b)(8.1)-(b)(8.1)(A), (b)(8.2)(E)3. and (b)(9)(E) filed 12-15-2014; operative 1-1-2015 pursuant to section 18312(e)(1)(A), title 2, California Code of Regulations. Submitted to OAL for filing and printing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements) (Register 2014, No. 51). 34. Redesignation of portions of subsection (b)(8)(A) as new subsections (b)(8)(B)-(D), amendment of subsections (b)(8.1)-(b)(8.1)(A), redesignation of portions of subsection (b)(8.1)(A) as new subsections (b)(8.1)(B)-(C) and amendment of subsection (b)(9)(E) filed 12- 1-2016; operative 12-31-2016 pursuant to Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2, section 18312(e). Submitted to OAL for filing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision,        Packet Page. 65 20 April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements and not subject to procedural or substantive review by OAL) (Register 2016, No. 49). 35. Amendment of subsections (b)(8.1)-(b)(8.1)(A) and (b)(9)(E) filed 12-12-2018; operative 1- 11-2019 pursuant to Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, section 18312(e). Submitted to OAL for filing and printing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements and not subject to procedural or substantive review by OAL) (Register 2018, No. 50). 36. Amendment of subsections (b)(8.1)-(8.1)(A) filed 12-23-2020; operative 1-1-2021 pursuant to Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, section 18312(e). Submitted to OAL for filing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements and not subject to procedural or substantive review by OAL) (Register 2020, No. 52). 37. Amendment of subsections (b)(3)(C), (b)(5)(C), (b)(5.5), (b)(5.5)(A)(2), (b)(7)(D), (b)(8)(A), (b)(8.1)(A), (b)(8.2)(A), (b)(8.2)(C)-(D), (b)(8.3)(A), (b)(9), (b)(9.3), (b)(9.5), (b)(10) and (b)(11) and footnote 5 filed 5-12-2021; operative 6-11-2021 pursuant to Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, section 18312(e). Submitted to OAL for filing pursuant to Fair Political Practices Commission v. Office of Administrative Law, 3 Civil C010924, California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, nonpublished decision, April 27, 1992 (FPPC regulations only subject to 1974        Packet Page. 66 21 Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking requirements and not subject to procedural or substantive review by OAL) (Register 2021, No. 20).        Packet Page. 67 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Genoveva Rocha, City Clerk Department:City Clerk Subject:Approval of Various Mayor and City Council Meeting Minutes Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve the minutes for the following meeting dates: 1. June 7, 2023 Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 2. June 26, 2023 Special Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 3. July 19, 2023, Regular Meeting of the mayor and City Council 4. July 3, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 5. July 17, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 6. August 7, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 7. August 21, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 8. September 4, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council Click or tap here to enter text. Click or tap here to enter text. Click or tap here to enter text. Click or tap here to enter text. Click or tap here to enter text. Click or tap here to enter text. Click or tap here to enter text.        Packet Page. 68 City of San Bernardino 201 North E Street San Bernardino, CA 92401 http://www.sbcity.org Draft Minutes FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR HOUSING AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SAN BERNARDINO JOINT POWERS FINANCING AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, JUNE 7, 2023 5:30 PM Closed Session was called to order at 5:33p.m. by Mayor Helen Tran on Wednesday, June 7, 2023, at Feldheym Central Library, San Bernardino, CA. CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Present 5:37 PM Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Present 5:42 PM; left at 12:09 AM Juan Figueroa Council Member, Ward 3 Present Fred Shorett Mayor Pro-Tem, Ward 4 Present Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Present Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Present Damon L Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Absent Helen Tran Mayor Present Charles McNeely Interim City Manager Present Sonia Carvalho City Attorney Present Genoveva Rocha City Clerk Present Courtney Bowen Deputy City Clerk Present Mayor Helen Tran Council Members Theodore Sanchez Sandra Ibarra Juan Figueroa Fred Shorett Ben Reynoso Kimberly Calvin Damon L. Alexander        Packet Page. 69 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 2 5:30 PM CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENT Treasure Ortiz commented that she has heard that some Council Members have been trying to hand-pick a City Manager candidate. She stated that the process is ethically corrupt. CLOSED SESSION A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ­ EXISTING LITIGATION (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) and (d)(1): i)Jose Garibo, individually v. City of San Bernardino, et al., United States District Court Case No. 5:22-cv-00935SSS(SHKx) ii)Michael Pacewiczh v. City of San Bernardino, Workers’ Compensation Case Nos. ADJ13363900; ADJ2371411; ADJ1672800; and ADJ11174282 B. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957) City Manager 7:00 PM The Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Mayor Helen Tran on Wednesday, June 7, 2023. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Pastor Joshua Beckley of Ecclesia Christian Fellowship led the Invocation and Donavin Turner, son of City employee Courtney Bowen, Deputy City Clerk, led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Sonia Carvalho stated there were three closed session items discussed. There was reportable action on Item No. A (1) Jose Garibo vs. City of San Bernardino. The City Council voted unanimously to approve a mediated settlement in the amount of $495,000.00. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Pastor Paul E. Jones of Independent Trinity Benjamin E. Jones Community Resource Center led the Invocation and Jazmyn Goumashyan of Cajon High School led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. At this time, Mayor Tran re-ordered the agenda. ‘Presentations’ were heard before ‘Public Comments.’ PRESENTATIONS 1. Proclamation of the for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer+ (LGBTQ+) Pride Month in the City of San Bernardino – June 2023 (All Wards)        Packet Page. 70 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 3 Mayor Tran presented the Proclamation to Rainbow Pride Youth Alliance. 2. Proclamation for Fatherhood Awareness Month in the City of San Bernardino – June 2023 (All Wards) Mayor Tran presented the Proclamation to Ryan Berryman of San Bernardino Fatherhood. 3. Proclamation of National Law Enforcement Week in the City of San Bernardino – June 12th–16th 2023 (All Wards) Mayor Tran presented the Proclamation to Ricardo Tomboc of the San Bernardino Area Chamber of Commerce. 4. Presentation of California Parks and Recreation Society, Community Champion Award to Youth Sports program volunteer Konstance Murrell. The award was not presented at the Mayor and City Council meeting but will be provided to the recipient at a later date. APPOINTMENTS City Clerk Genoveva Rocha read the following public comment into the record, per requested ADA accommodation: Tim Dorame stated that the appointee for the Charter Review committee, Leticia Briggs, is not qualified. With consensus from the Mayor and City Council, all appointments were approved by a single motion. 5. Water Board Reappointment of Thomas M. Brickley 6. Charter Review Appointment of Leticia O. Briggs (Mayor’s Appointment) 7. Downtown Advisory Committee Appointment of Reginald L. Woods (Mayor’s Appointment) RESULT: APPROVED APPOINTMENTS, AGENDA ITEM NOs 5-7 [7-0] MOVER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 SECONDER:Sandra Ibarra, Council Member, Ward 2 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Tran ABSENT:Damon Alexander PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS LISTED AND NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Treasure Ortiz commented that the City needs a plan for homelessness and stated that there should be rent control in the City as well. Maria Ortiz, in Spanish with an English interpreter, thanked Council Member Ibarra and SB Food Fest for the assistance provided to her business, Ortiz Ice Cream.        Packet Page. 71 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 4 Name unknown spoke in Spanish with an English interpreter, asked for the City to help with issues at this small business such as homelessness and violence. He also suggested social media classes for small business owners. Karen Suarez, Director of Uplift San Bernardino, expressed gratitude for Item No. 17. She stated that the small business community will be celebrating. She also thanked the Mayor and City Council for having a conversation about tenant protections. Al Palazzo provided a list of types of development that can be completed on Mt. Vernon Avenue. He also supported monuments for Route 66. Robert Lopez spoke in Spanish with an English interpreter, thanked everyone for being kind to street vendors like himself. Yeni Ruiz spoke in Spanish with an English interpreter, stated the importance of supporting street vendors. She thanked the entrepreneur center for helping her start her business and become successful. John Hillman compared the City of San Bernardino to Seattle and Portland in terms of the spirit of people in a broken city. Dominic Antonez stated there is a spiritual battle going on in the City, and that raves represent spiritual wickedness. Brandon Ponce, region director for Pony Baseball, asked that the City renegotiate the contract for the Fiscalini baseball fields. Esmeralda Negrete spoke about the City Manger recruitment, storage facilities, a homeless center, and solid waste fees. Mike Hartley expressed opposition to reducing public comment time. He voiced his disappointment with Code Enforcement and Parking Enforcement. Richard Rodriguez stated that the “Santa Fe” building behind the police station has been closed for 20 years and it should be boarded up. At this time, Public Comment was temporarily paused to begin the Public Hearings that were noticed for 8:00 p.m., Item numbers 18, 19, and 20. Council Member Calvin recused herself from voting for Items 18 and 19. She stated that her reasoning was bias; She strongly opposed these projects and publicly spoke against them at the Planning Commission meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS 18. Appeal 23­01 of Conditional Use Permit 21­18 and Public Convenience or Necessity Letter 21­07 (Ward 1) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino,        Packet Page. 72 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 5 California, adopt Resolution No. 2023-060 denying Appeal 23-01 thereby upholding the Planning Commission’s denial of Conditional Use Permit 21-18 and Public Convenience or Necessity Letter 21-07 not allowing the development, establishment, and operation of a market with a new Alcohol Beverage Control Type 21(Off-Sale General) License within an existing building containing approximately 2,024 square feet (Mikey’s Market) on a parcel containing 0.45 acres located at 1820 W. 5th Street (APN: 0138-081-19) within the Commercial General (CG-1) zone (Attachment 1). Mayor Tran opened the public hearing at 8:03 p.m. There were no disclosures from the Mayor and City Council regarding ex parte communications. City Clerk Rocha swore-in the appellant and speakers. Assistant City Planner Mike Rosales gave a presentation to the Mayor and City Council. Mr. Rosales advised that the appellant’s permit was denied because of an overconcentration of the same type of business in the area and being too close to a liquor store. He commented that the business was defined as a “liquor store” because of its size. In accordance with the requirements of a Quasi-Judicial hearing, the appellant was given 15 minutes to speak, plus a five-minute rebuttal. The appellant, Fernando Castro, stated that he has invested a lot of money and time into the property. He clarified that his establishment is a market, not a liquor store. He stated that he is trying to help his community. There were five public comments heard: Dolores Armstead, Planning Commissioner, stated that this project was denied because of the high concentration of liquor stores in the area. Cheryl Brown, former Planning Commissioner, stated that the City is abiding by State Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) rules regarding locations of liquor stores. Ali Payne spoke in favor of denying this appeal. Treasure Ortiz commented in favor of denying the appeal. She stated that there are already five other liquor stores in the same vicinity. Les spoke in favor of denying the appeal. The public hearing was closed at 8:41 p.m.        Packet Page. 73 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 6 RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2023-060 [3-2] MOVER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 SECONDER:Sandra Ibarra, Council Member, Ward 2 AYES:Ibarra, Figueroa, Reynoso NOES:Sanchez, Shorett RECUSED:Kimberly Calvin ABSENT:Damon Alexander 19.Appeal 23­02 for Conditional Use Permit 22­13 and Minor Exception 22­04 (Ward 6) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-061, denying Appeal 23-02 thereby upholding Planning Commission’s denial of Conditional Use Permit 22-13 and Minor Exception 22-04 to allow the development, establishment, and operation of a self-storage facility comprised of two (2) multi-story buildings containing a total of approximately 109,000 square feet, and a ten (10) percent increase in the building height from thirty (30) feet to thirty-three (33) feet located at 1534 W. Highland Avenue (APN(s): 0148-174-04, 10, 11, 15 through 18), within the Commercial General (CG-1) zone (Attachment 1); Or 2.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-079 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, granting Appeal 23-02 of the Planning Commission’s denial, thereby approving Conditional Use Permit 22-12 and Minor Exception 22-04 to allow the development, establishment, and operation of a self-storage facility comprised of two (2) multi-story buildings containing a total of approximately 109,000 square feet, and a ten (10) percent increase in the building height from thirty (30) feet to thirty (33) feet located at 1534 W. Highland Avenue (APN(s): 0148-174-04, 10, 11, 15 through 18), within the Commercial General (CG-1) zone; and finding the project subject to a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (Attachment 7). Mayor Tran opened the public hearing at 8:57 p.m. There were no disclosures from the Mayor and City Council regarding ex parte communications. City Clerk Rocha swore-in the appellant and speakers. Assistant City Planner Elizabeth Mora-Rodriguez gave a presentation to the Mayor and City Council. Ms. Mora-Rodriguez stated that the permit was denied because the land use for industrial construction is not compatible with the surrounding area. She stated that out of the seven commissioners present at the Planning Commission meeting, only three voted in favor of the project, which resulted in an automatic denial.        Packet Page. 74 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 7 In accordance with the requirements of a Quasi-Judicial hearing, the appellant was given 15 minutes to speak, plus a five-minute rebuttal. The appellant’s attorney, Brent McManigal of Fennemore Law Firm, advised that the proposed storage facility would provide interior access, climate control, and include four storage units for the City free of charge. Council Member Ibarra asked about the proximity of this project to another storage facility, as well as the commercial success of other SafeStore locations. There were ten public comments provided: Vahak A. stated that his client is the owner of this business. He spoke in favor of granting the appeal. Nivi Anabi (phonetic spelling) commented that she is the owner of the property in question and supports granting the appeal. Christian Shaughnessy spoke in opposition to granting the appeal. He stated that the community needs homes, not storage facilities. Dolores Armstead, Planning Commissioner, stated that this project was denied because there are three other storage facilities within a mile radius. She opposed the granting of the appeal. Cheryl Brown spoke in opposition to granting the appeal. Rikke Van Johnson stated that this area would be more conducive to retail and restaurants than a storage facility. Treasure Ortiz advised that the community would rather have restaurants and housing in the area. Joselyn Feazell Sanders spoke in opposition to granting the appeal. She said that this area only needs storage because people have been evicted or are homeless. Al Palazzo spoke in opposition to granting the appeal and asked that the storage facility be placed somewhere else. Luis Ojeda spoke in favor of granting the appeal, and stated that the business will make money because the City is a logistics hub. At this time, the appellant was allowed five additional minutes for rebuttal. Mr. McManigal reiterated his client’s proposal, thanked the Mayor and City Council, and asked them to grant the appeal. Council Member Ibarra asked staff to clarify what the Planning Commission’s vote was on this project.        Packet Page. 75 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 8 Assistant City Planner Mora-Rodriguez stated that only three Commissioners voted in favor of this item at the original Planning Commission meeting. On March 14, 2023, a ratification of the denial of the appeal was brought before the commission, and that item carried with a 6-1 vote. The public hearing was closed at 9:50 p.m. Council Member Reynoso made a motion to deny the appeal. There was no second to his motion. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2023-079, GRANTING APPEAL NO. 23-02 [4-1] MOVER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett NOES:Ben Reynoso RECUSED:Kimberly Calvin ABSENT:Damon Alexander 20.Presentation of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2023­24 Operating Budget and Capital Improvement Plan (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California: 1.Conduct the Public Hearing on the proposed Fiscal Year 2023-24 Operating Budget and Capital Improvement Plan; 2.Receive and file the proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2023-24 Operating and Capital Improvement Plan presentation and provide direction to staff. Mayor Tran opened the public hearing at 9:51 p.m. Mayor Tran called a ten-minute recess prior to the start of the staff presentation, returning at 10:07 p.m. Council Member Calvin also returned to the dais at this time. Agency Director of Administrative Services Barbara Whitehorn and Budget Manager Zuyva Ruiz gave a presentation to the Mayor and City Council on the Midcycle Biennial Budget. There were two public comments: Treasure Ortiz asked where the revenue from the cannabis tax money was. She also asked the Mayor and City Council to pave the streets, turn on the lights, and provide more infrastructure. Sharon Negrete began her public comment, but it was not related to the Public Hearing, so she was advised to return during the regular public comment period when it resumed. Discussion amongst the Mayor and City Council included setting aside funds for street rehabilitation, CIP (Capital Improvement Plan) projects, and other infrastructure and        Packet Page. 76 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 9 planning needs. Interim City Manager McNeely advised the City Council that staff was currently working on several large projects within the City, as directed by the Council. City Attorney Carvalho intervened and advised the Council that this was a “receive and file” item, and that they can give staff direction, but no voting will take place. Interim City Manager McNeely assured the Mayor and City Council that all of their requests would be brought forward at a future special meeting. The public hearing was closed at 11:12 p.m. RESULT: ITEM NO. 20 WAS A RECEIVE AND FILE ITEM – DIRECTION WAS PROVIDED TO STAFF TO BRING BACK, AT THE NEXT BUDGET DISCUSSION, A PLAN TO RESERVE TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS OF THE STRATEGIC INITIATIVE RESERVE AND THE CAPITAL CONTINGENCY RESERVE FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS; PROVIDE A REASSESSED STREET REHABILITATION PROGRAM, AND PROPOSALS ON HOW TO USE THE FUNDING. IN ADDITION, STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO OUTLINE A PLAN ON INCREASING STAFFING FOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS TO AN OPTIMAL LEVEL AND ALLOW COUNCIL TO RESERVE SUFFICIENT FUNDING FOR THOSE STAFFING NEEDS. Regular Open Session Public Comment resumed at this time. M. Sherman, spoke in opposition to Item No. 16. He stated that rent stabilization will drive small landlords out of business. Victor C. with the California Apartment Association also spoke in opposition to Item No. 16. He stated that his organization has a Resident’s Bill of Rights and provides assistance to tenants when needed. Maribel Nunez commented in support of Item No. 16. She suggested that the City develop a “Rent Board” to consider this issue. Julie C. stated that she represents mobile homeowners and warned everyone of the unintended consequences of rent control, including reduced available housing. Desiree Sanchez spoke in support of Item No. 16. She stated that the average person living in San Bernardino must work multiple jobs to be able to afford rent. Luis Ojeda expressed that the City needs a permanent City Manager that is going to stay for a while. Robert Porter stated that the City has great workers. He thanked April from Parks and Recreation for being an artist and helping to fix a local monument.        Packet Page. 77 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 10 Olga, spoke in Spanish with an interpreter, asked the Mayor and City Council to not forget about the street vendors and day laborers. She wanted to make sure a worker resource center was still being proposed. Georgia Lykouretzos commented that the plan for homelessness needs to include a plan for their pets as well. Lyzeth Mendoza spoke in favor of an entrepreneurial resource center for people who need assistance with business registration and permits. Clementina Pina Bernal, spoke in Spanish with an interpreter, commented that the Burrtec solid waste rates are too high. She asked what factors were considered when considering an increase. Jessica Alcocer commented that she wanted to support Item No. 17, but she needed more information about the project. She asked for more assistance for entrepreneurs. Ray Turner said that he lives in the 6th Ward, but he is invested in the whole city. He cares for his community and is willing to help. Sharon Negrete spoke in support of the animals in the City. She discussed an upcoming event for rescue pets that she would like the City’s support for. Christian Flores expressed support for Item No. 16. He stated that housing development is a priority. He also stated that Burrtec offers a senior discount for trash pickup. At this time, the following remote speakers were heard via Zoom: James Albert expressed strong support for Item No. 16 and tenant protections. Christian Cazares also spoke in support of Item 16. At this time, City Clerk Genoveva Rocha read the following written comments into the record, per ADA accommodation requests: Hardy Brown said that he wants to remove Council Member Shorett for making inappropriate and derogatory comments about the Mayor. Tim Dorame expressed that Daniel Hernandez should be fired for allowing concrete crushing in the City. Following these comments, one more public comment was heard from the audience: Claudia Bautista, Interim Executive Director with the Pomona Economic Opportunity Center, asked for clarification regarding Item No. 17. She stated that people with limited English proficiency and limited education do not understand the process and can’t participate. At this time, Public Comment ended, and the Consent Calendar was introduced.        Packet Page. 78 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 11 Council Member Ibarra left the dais after Public Comment ended and was not present for the remainder of the meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and are voted on in a single motion unless a council or staff member has pulled the item for more discussion. RESULT: APPROVED THE CONSENT CALENDAR [5-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES:Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT:Sandra Ibarra, Damon Alexander 8. Resolution Accepting the California Energy Commission ­ Automated Permit Processing Program Grant Award Recommendation It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Adopt Resolution No. 2023-077: 1. Accepting grant award funds in the amount of $100,000 from the California Energy Commission – California Automated Permit Processing Program for establishing an online, automated solar permitting platform; and 2. Authorizing the City Manager to conduct all negotiations, signing, and submittals of all necessary documents to receive the grant award; and 3. Authorizing the Agency Director of Administrative Services to amend the FY2022/23 operating budget to appropriate $100,000 in grant funding to both revenues and expenditures. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2023-077 [5-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES:Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT:Sandra Ibarra, Damon Alexander 9. Approval of Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement for Accounting Consultant Services with Annie Clark (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, authorize the execution of Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement with Annie Clark for accounting consultation services extending the agreement to June 30, 2024. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [5-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES:Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT:Sandra Ibarra, Damon Alexander        Packet Page. 79 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 12 10. City Board, Commission, and Citizen Advisory Committee Minutes Approved in March/April 2023 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino receive and file the minutes from the City board, commission, and citizen advisory committee meetings approved in March and April 2023. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [5-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES:Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT:Sandra Ibarra, Damon Alexander 11. Approval of Commercial and Payroll Disbursements (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California approve the commercial and payroll disbursements for May 2023. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [5-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES:Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT:Sandra Ibarra, Damon Alexander 12. Annual Renewal of the City’s Risk Management and Property Insurance Policies for FY 2023/24 (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Approve the annual renewal of the City’s property insurance, excess general liability insurance, excess workers’ compensation insurance, crime insurance and cyber insurance; and 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute all related documentation. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [5-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES:Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT:Sandra Ibarra, Damon Alexander        Packet Page. 80 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 13 13. Amendment No. 1 to Agreement with IDS Group, Inc. (Wards 4,7) Recommendation It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, authorize the execution of Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement with IDS Group, Inc., for the design of the Newmark Ball Field and Speicher Multipurpose Field Lighting, extending the agreement until May 17, 2024. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [5-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES:Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT:Sandra Ibarra, Damon Alexander 14.Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreements for On­Call Pre­Qualified Engineering Services to 23 Firms and Amendment No 2. Professional Services Agreements for On­Call Pre­Qualified Engineering Services to 1 Firm (All Wards) Recommendation It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: Approve Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreements (PSA) for On-Call Pre- Qualified Engineering Services to 23 Firms; and Amendment No. 2 to Professional Services Agreements (PSA) for On-Call Pre-Qualified Engineering Services to 1 Firm. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [5-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES:Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT:Sandra Ibarra, Damon Alexander DISCUSSION 15.City Clerk’s Office System Implementation Updates Recommendation: Receive and file an update on implementing the Public Records Request Management System (PRRMS) through NextRequest, and Municipal Code Web Hosting and Codification through American Legal Publishing. RESULT: RECEIVE AND FILE; NO ACTION TAKEN 16.Discussion on Tenant Protection Options to Protect City Residents Facing Housing Instability. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1.Adopt Resolution 2023-078 Approving a Legal Aid Tenant Protection Pilot Program, and 2.Provide Staff Direction to Continue or Discontinue Further Studies Needed to        Packet Page. 81 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 14 Develop and Implement a Residential Rent Stabilization Ordinance and Rent Registry There was no discussion amongst the Council about this item. Council Member Sanchez made a motion to deny staff’s recommendation; Council Member Figueroa seconded. Council Member Calvin made a substitute motion to approve the recommendation; Council Member Reynoso seconded. RESULT: SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2023-078 [FAILED 2-3] MOVER:Kimberly Calvin, Council Member, Ward 5 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Reynoso, Calvin NOES:Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett ABSENT:Sandra Ibarra, Damon Alexander RESULT: APPROVED ORIGINAL MOTION TO DENY STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION AND DENY ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2023-078 [3-2] MOVER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES:Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett NOES:Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT:Sandra Ibarra, Damon Alexander 17.American Rescue Plan Act­Funded Entrepreneurial Development Services and Resource Center Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Approve a reallocation of $1,000,000.00 of American Rescue Plan Act (“ARPA”) funds from the Small Business Education and Training Resources allocation to the Entrepreneurial Development Services and Resource Center (the “ERC,” also known as the Aspen Institute Initiative) for a total of $2,000,000 allocated to the ERC. 2. Authorize the Interim City Manager, or designee, to take necessary steps to implement and administer the agreement including executing an agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) with the Inland Empire Center for Entrepreneurship in an amount not to exceed $1,873,700.00 through December 31, 2026, and signing subsequent, necessary, and related documents to implement the MOU. Council Member Sanchez made a motion to approve staff’s recommendation; Council Member Figueroa seconded. Council Member Reynoso made a substitute motion to        Packet Page. 82 Regular Meeting Minutes June 7, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 15 continue this item to a future workshop to discuss the details at length. The motion was seconded by Council Member Calvin. There was consensus from the City Council to support the motion and no opposition was noted; therefore, no formal vote was taken. RESULT: CONTINUED TO A FUTURE SPECIAL WORKSHOP, DATE TO BE DETERMINED, TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM AND THE INVESTMENT PLAYBOOK IN DETAIL [CONSENSUS] ABSENT:Sandra Ibarra, Damon Alexander MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL UPDATES/REPORTS ON CONFERENCES/MEETINGS There were no updates shared. ADJOURNMENT The meeting of the Mayor and City Council was adjourned on Thursday, June 8, 2023, at 12:23 a.m. The next joint regular meeting of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency will be held on Wednesday, June 21, 2023, in the Council Chamber located at 555 West 6th Street, San Bernardino, California 92410. Closed Session will begin at 5:30 p.m. Open Session will begin at 7:00 p.m. By:_________________________        Packet Page. 83 City of San Bernardino 201 North E Street San Bernardino, CA 92401 http://www.sbcity.org Draft Minutes FOR THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR HOUSING AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SAN BERNARDINO JOINT POWERS FINANCING AUTHORITY MONDAY, JUNE 26, 2023 5:00 PM The Special Meeting of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino was called to order at 5:36 PM by Mayor Pro Tem Fred Shorett on Monday, June 26, 2023, at 201 N ‘E’ Street, San Bernardino, CA 92401 - Multipurpose Conference Room 2nd Floor. Pursuant to Assembly Bill AB2449, Mayor Helen Tran participated in the meeting remotely, via Zoom, at the following location: Luana Kai Resort • Room D308 • 940 S. Kihei Rd • Kihei, HI 96753 • CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Title Status Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Present Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Present Juan Figueroa Council Member, Ward 3 Present Fred Shorett Mayor Pro-Tem, Ward 4 Present Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Left at 7:12 PM Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Absent Damon L Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Present Helen Tran Mayor Present via Zoom Charles McNeely Interim City Manager Present Sonia Carvalho City Attorney Present Courtney Bowen Deputy City Clerk Present Mayor Helen Tran Council Members Theodore Sanchez Sandra Ibarra Juan Figueroa Fred Shorett Ben Reynoso Kimberly Calvin Damon L. Alexander        Packet Page. 84 Special Meeting Minutes June 26, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 2 5:30 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmember Juan Figueroa led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS LISTED AND NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Andy Lara commented about the condition of the City. He stated that the City needs repairs throughout buildings, parks, and streets. He also mentioned installing cameras to help secure City property. DISCUSSION 1.Receive and File Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Update and Approve Funding Shortfalls for Capital Improvement Program Projects Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Receive and file an update regarding the City of San Bernardino’s Capital Improvement Program; and 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-090 authorizing the Agency Director of Administrative Services to amend the FY 2023/24 Capital Improvement Plan, recording supplemental appropriations in the amount of $1,000,000 from the Capital Contingency Reserve Fund for the Cross Street Bridge Project; and$1,040,258 from Measure S for the Genevieve Circuit Lighting Project; and$1,243,294 from Measure S for the Ralston Circuit Lighting Project. Agency Director of Public Works, Operations, and Maintenance Director Daniel Hernandez introduced members of the Public Works team and gave an overview of the project delivery process, as well as a summary of the City’s current CIP (Capital Improvement Program) projects. Acting City Engineer Susan Pan and Public Works project managers provided more detailed information regarding various existing projects. Councilmember Sanchez requested a priority list for the CIP projects, to know which projects needed funding. Council Members asked for staff to include more project specifics in reports in the future, including funding sources and locations of improvements. He also inquired how street improvements will be prioritized moving forward, especially CIP projects. Council Member Reynoso left the meeting at 7:12 PM. and was not present to vote on the item. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [5-0] MOVER:Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 SECONDER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Alexander ABSENT:Ben Reynoso, Kimberly Calvin        Packet Page. 85 Special Meeting Minutes June 26, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 3 2.Resolution Adopting List of Projects under SB1 2023/2024 Road Maintenance Program; Approving Cooperative Funding Agreement with County of San Bernardino for Mountain Drive and Fourth Avenue Project; Approving the Cooperative Funding Agreement with County of San Bernardino for 5th Street at Pedley Road Project; and Authorizing the Agency Director of Finance to Amend the FY 2023/24 Capital Improvement Plan, Recording Supplemental Appropriations (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt: 1.Resolution No. 2023 -091 approving the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation proposed project list for submittal to the California Transportation Commission and adopting a list of projects for Fiscal Year 2023/24 to be funded by Senate Bill 1: Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017; and 2.Resolution No. 2023-092 approving the Cooperative Funding Agreement with County of San Bernardino for Mountain Drive and Fourth Avenue Project and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute the Cooperative Funding Agreement for Mountain Drive and Fourth Avenue Project; and authorize the Agency Director of Finance to amend the FY 2023/24 Capital Improvement Plan, recording a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $624,319.49 in SB1 Fund and $131,930.51 in Gas Tax Fund, for a total project of $756,250.00 for Mountain Drive and Fourth Avenue Project; and 3.Resolution No. 2023-093 approving the Cooperative Funding Agreement with County of San Bernardino for 5th Street at Pedley Road Project and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute the Cooperative Funding Agreement for 5th Street at Pedley Road Project and authorize the Agency Director of Finance to amend the FY 2023/24 Capital Improvement Plan, recording a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $293,481.76 in SB1 Fund and $62,018.24 in Gas Tax Fund, for a total project of $355,500.00 for 5th Street at Pedley Road Project; and 4.Resolution No. 2023-094 authorizing the Agency Director of Finance to amend the FY 2023/24 Capital Improvement Plan, recording supplemental appropriations: In the amount of $2,472,924.36 in SB1 Fund and $522,575.64 in Gas Tax Fund, for a total additional appropriation of $2,995,500.00 for Arden Avenue and Other Roads; Blake Street and Other Roads ; Citrus Street and Other Roads ; Lynwood Drive and Other Roads; Third Street and Other Roads; North San Bernardino Area Curb Ramps Projects, which were approved on Resolution No 2021-236; and In the amount of $188,843.75 in SB1 Fund and $39,906.25 in Gas Tax Fund, for a total additional appropriation of $228,750.00 for 40th Street and Other Roads Project, which was approved on Resolution No 2020-227 and 2023-023. In the amount of $1,944,044.64 in SB1 Fund and $410,813.36 in Gas Tax Fund, for a total additional appropriation of $2,354,858.00 for Street Rehabilitation – 21 locations (Project No. 13511) Project.        Packet Page. 86 Special Meeting Minutes June 26, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 4 Director Hernandez advised that this item was incorporated into the presentation for Item No. 1. Public Works Consultant Okan Demirci provided information about current and upcoming SB1 funds and projects. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [5-0] MOVER:Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 SECONDER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Alexander ABSENT:Ben Reynoso, Kimberly Calvin ADJOURNMENT The Special meeting of the Mayor and City Council was adjourned on Monday, June 26, 2023, at 8:47 p.m. The next joint Special meeting - Workshop of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency will be held on Friday, June 30, 2023, at the Multipurpose Conference Room, 2nd Floor, 201 North “E” Street, San Bernardino, California 92410. Open Session will begin at 9:00 a.m. By: ________________________ Genoveva Rocha, CMC        Packet Page. 87 City of San Bernardino 201 North E Street San Bernardino, CA 92401 http://www.sbcity.org Draft Minutes FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR HOUSING AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SAN BERNARDINO JOINT POWERS FINANCING AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 2023 5:30 PM Closed Session was called to order at 5:34 PM by Mayor Helen Tran on Wednesday, July 19, 2023, at Feldheym Central Library, San Bernardino, CA. CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Title Status Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Present Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Present Juan Figueroa Council Member, Ward 3 Present Fred Shorett Mayor Pro-Tem, Ward 4 Present Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Present Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Present Damon L Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Present Helen Tran Mayor Present Charles McNeely Interim City Manager Present Sonia Carvalho City Attorney Present Telicia Lopez Chief Deputy City Clerk Present Courtney Bowen Deputy City Clerk Mayor Helen Tran Council Members Theodore Sanchez Sandra Ibarra Juan Figueroa Fred Shorett Ben Reynoso Kimberly Calvin Damon L. Alexander        Packet Page. 88 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 2 5:30 PM CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENT There were no public comments for Closed Session. CLOSED SESSION A) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ­ EXISTING LITIGATION (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) and (d)(1): i.The Estate of Rob Marquise Adams, by and through its Personal Representatives, Tamika King, et al. v. City of San Bernardino, United States District Court Case No. 5:22-cv-02206-JGB-SP ii.Andrea Miller v. City of San Bernardino, et al., San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. CIVDS2015337 and Court of Appeals Case No. E080807 iii.Promise Gracia, et al. v. City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. CIVSB2301828 iv.Brian Pellis, John Vasek v. City of San Bernardino, San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. CIVSB2226731. B) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957) City Manager 7:00 PM The Regular Meeting was called to order at 7:16 PM by Mayor Helen Tran on Wednesday, July 19, 2023. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Reverend Dr. Fred Adams from the Rock Church led the Invocation and Council Member Sandra Ibarra led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Mayor Tran called the meeting to order in memory of “Charlie” Jacobs, a community member who recently passed away. A moment of silence was observed. Council Member Calvin and Neighborhood Association President Lynn Ware shared anecdotes of Ms. Jacobs. CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Sonia Carvalho stated there was no reportable action from Closed Session. PRESENTATIONS 1.Economic Development Tools Presentation by Kosmont Companies (All Wards) Larry Kosmont and Joe Diegas of Kosmont Companies provided a presentation. 2.Citizen of the Month – Brandon Eldiab, Jimmy’s Liquor – 1st Ward 3.Citizen of the Month – Marti Christiansen, Business Watch – 1st Ward 4.Citizen of the Month – Gurpreet Singh, La Cadena Market – 1st Ward        Packet Page. 89 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 3 5.Citizen of the Month – Luis Ojeda, We Are The Change – 1st Ward Council Member Sanchez presented certificates for Citizen of the Month to Brandon Eldiab, Marti Christiansen, Luis Ojeda, and Gurpreet “Peter” Singh. APPOINTMENTS With consensus from the Mayor and City Council, all appointments were approved by a single motion. 6. Animal Control Commission Appointment of Sharon A. Negrete (Ward 4) 7. Downtown Advisory Committee Appointment of Vincent D. Laster (Ward 4) 8.Arts and Historical Preservation Commission Appointment of Jeffreda Curry (Ward 4) 9.Measure S Citizens Oversight Committee Appointment of Jeffreda Curry (Ward 4) 10.Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission Appointment of Esmeralda Negrete (Ward 4) RESULT: APPROVED APPOINTMENTS, AGENDA ITEM NOs 6-10 [8-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander, Tran Mayor Pro-Tem Shorett presented certificates to Sharon Negrete, Vincent Laster, and Jeffreda Curry for their appointments. Esmeralda Negrete was not present at the meeting. At 8:24 p.m., Mayor Tran re-ordered the agenda to ensure that the Public Hearings, Item No. 28 and Item No. 29, were heard at their published times. PUBLIC HEARING 28.Public Hearing on Fiscal Year 2023/24 Assessment Levies for Previously Formed Assessment Districts. (All Wards) Recommendation: Hold public hearing and: 1.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-108 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for Assessment District No. 1022 and Zones 1, 2 and 3 thereof for Fiscal Year 2023-24; 2.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-109 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for Assessment District Nos. 1017, 1019, 1020, 1023 and 1024 for Fiscal Year 2023-24; 3.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-110 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of        Packet Page. 90 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 4 San Bernardino, California, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for Assessment District Nos. 1028, 1029, 1030, 1031, 1032, 1035 (ZONE 1), 1035 (ZONE 2), 1036,1037, 1038, 1039, 1040, 1041, 1042, 1043 (ZONE 1), 1043 (ZONE 2), 1045, 1046, 1047, 1048, 1050, 1052, 1054, 1055, 1056, 1057, 1059, 1060, 1063, 1064 and 1068 for Fiscal Year 2023-24; 4.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-111 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for Assessment District Nos. 951 (ZONE 1), 951 (ZONE 2), 952 (ZONES 1, 2 AND 2A), 952 (ZONE 3),953, 956, 959 (ZONE 1), 962, 963, 968, 974, 975, 976, 981, 982, 986, 989, 991, 993, 997, 1001, 1002, 1005, 1007, 1012 and 1016 for Fiscal Year 2023-24; and 5.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-112 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for Assessment District Nos. 1025 and 1027 for Fiscal Year 2023-24. Mayor Tran opened the public hearing at 8:24 p.m. A presentation was provided by Shane Spicer of Spicer Consulting. There were no public comments or requests to speak. The public hearing was closed at 8:29 p.m. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NOs. 2023-108, 2023-109, 2023-110, 2023-111, and 2023-112 [7-0] MOVER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER:Damon L. Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 29.Public Hearing Regarding Solid Waste Rate Increases and Resolution Adopting Rates for Solid Waste Services, Approving Third Amendment to the City’s Exclusive Franchise Agreement for Integrated Solid Waste Collection, Processing and Disposal Services with Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc., and Finding the Action Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California execute the following actions: 1.Proceed with the continued Public Hearing to receive comments on the proposed rate increases and Third Amendment to the City’s Exclusive Franchise Agreement for Integrated Solid Waste Collection, Processing and Disposal Services with Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc. (“Burrtec”); and 2.Close the Public Hearing after all public comments have been heard; and 3.Determine if written protests have been received from the owners and tenants from parcels which are subject to the solid waste service rate increases, and, if a majority protest is not received; and        Packet Page. 91 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 5 4.Adopt either: a. Resolution No. 2023-113, a Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Approving Third Amendment to the Exclusive Franchise Agreement for Integrated Solid Waste Collection, Processing, and Disposal Services with Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc., Adopting Maximum Permitted Service Rates, and Finding this Action Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Option A, previously referred to as Rate Option 2), or b. Resolution No. 2023-114, a Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Approving Third Amendment to the Exclusive Franchise Agreement for Integrated Solid Waste Collection, Processing, and Disposal Services with Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc., Adopting Maximum Permitted Service Rates, and Finding this Action Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Option B, previously referred to as Rate Option 4). City Attorney Carvalho read the requirements for Proposition 218 governing the Public Hearing into the record. Agency Director of Public Works, Operations, and Maintenance Daniel Hernandez provided background information and a presentation. Mayor Tran read the rules for public comments for the Public Hearing. Mayor Tran opened the public hearing at 8:47 p.m. There were four public speakers for the hearing: Eva Hazard, Community Manager of Mountain Shadows Senior Mobile Home Community; Chris Trevino of Valencia Mobile Home Park; “Malibu”; and “Les”; spoke in opposition to the Burrtec solid waste increase. Chief Deputy City clerk Telicia Lopez announced that there were 144 written protests received. She stated that a majority would have to consist of 21,460 valid protests, and this threshold was not met. The City Council was then invited by Mayor Tran to deliberate and act on the item. There was discussion regarding the length of the contract extension, the cost of the rate increase, senior rates, Senate Bill 1383, and rates in comparison to other cities. Council Member Alexander made a motion to bring the item back for consideration at the next regular meeting on August 2, 2023, changing the Senior Discount from 10% to 20%. There was no support for his motion. City Attorney Carvalho clarified with the Mayor and City council that as long as they are showing a “good faith” effort to comply with the new law, they are in compliance for the time being. There was a consensus amongst the Council that negotiations continue with Burrtec, or        Packet Page. 92 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 6 a Request for Proposals be submitted to obtain a new solid waste service provider. The public hearing was closed at 8:56 p.m. Council Member Reynoso motioned to continue the item to the September 6, 2023 Mayor and City Council Meeting, so that staff may continue to negotiate the rate increase with Burrtec and incorporate the suggestions from the City Council. RESULT: APPROVED TO CONTINUE THE ITEM TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 6, 2023, AND DIRECTED STAFF TO CONTINUE NEGOTATIONS WITH BURRTEC [7-0] MOVER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 SECONDER:Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander At this time, the Mayor and City Council proceeded with Open Session Public Comments. James Smith made an announcement about upcoming community events for the “Native Sons of the Golden West” organization. Al Palazzo spoke in favor of developing the downtown area of the City, and stated he has many ideas for affordable housing. Luis Ojeda stated that he had over 50 people accompany him to the meeting to make a public comment, but many of them had to leave due to the late hour. He also said that having special meetings at odd times does not help community engagement. Jose Cortez, with the assistance of an interpreter, stated in Spanish that he is being intimidated by a Code Enforcement officer regarding his home and property. Junior Carrillo commented that City staff, police officers, commissioners, and the Mayor and City Council deserve commendation and appreciation from the public. Harry Hatch requested that more enforcement be implemented regarding illegal fireworks. Edgar Montes spoke representing the North American Pallet Association regarding arson fires. He asked to work with local law enforcement to help prevent fires. AJ Singh commented regarding Code Enforcement harassing his small trucking business. He also asked for assistance with the homeless situation. Sam Catalano thanked staff for cleaning up city parks. Warren Marcucci also expressed appreciation for the parks clean up. Ernie Briones also thanked the City for cleaning up Perris Hill Park.        Packet Page. 93 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 7 An unnamed speaker commented that an NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) Inspector was rude and confrontational to him at his business. Mike Hartley spoke about “street sweeping” and “no parking” signs throughout the City. Malibu asked that the Mayor and City Council Regular Meetings be changed to an earlier time. She thanked staff and council members for working on the city parks. Karen Suarez spoke in support of Uplift San Bernardino, a local organization. She stated that the organization supports small and diverse-led developers in the City. Violetta Mendez expressed opposition to building more ADUs (Accessory Dwelling Units) in the City. Christian Flores spoke in support of the previous speaker, Violetta Mendez. John Hillman commented in support of keeping city parks clean and helping the homeless population. John Luna asked for support for his immigrant rights organization, the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights. Matthew Abrego, San Bernardino Police Dispatch Association, asked for dispatchers to be offered hazard pay or premium pay, as part of Federal ARPA (American Rescue Plan) COVID relief funding. “Lessy” spoke in opposition to more warehouses in the City, the I-10 express lane project, and “slumlords”. At this time, the following remote speakers were heard via Zoom: Georgia thanked Council Member Shorett for appointing someone to the Animal Control Commission. She expressed that many calls to animal services for loose stray animals go unanswered, and many animals are being killed at the shelter. An unnamed speaker spoke about Closed Session public comments. He stated that the Mayor and City Council are silencing the voice of the community. Chief Deputy City Clerk Telicia Lopez then read the following written comment into the record, per ADA accommodation: Hardy Brown thanked the Police Department for their enforcement of illegal firearms. He also expressed opposition to the Burrtec solid waste rate increase. CITY MANAGER UPDATE At this time, Public Information Officer Jeff Kraus provided community updates to the Mayor and City Council, including property and parks clean ups and seizure of illegal firearms.        Packet Page. 94 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 8 CONSENT CALENDAR Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and are voted on in a single motion unless a council or staff member has pulled the item for more discussion. RESULT: APPROVED THE CONSENT CALENDAR [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 11.Approval of Mayor and City Council Meeting Minutes Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approve the minutes for the following meetings: January 11, 2023 Special Meeting, January 18, 2023 Special Meeting; January 18, 2023 Regular Meeting; March 1, 2023 Regular Meeting. RESULT: APPROVED MINUTES [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 12.Agreement with Center for Employment Opportunities (CEO) (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1.Authorize the City Manager to execute a Maintenance Services Agreement with the Center for Employment Opportunities, (CEO), for City-wide right-of-way maintenance services, litter/illegal dumping collection, and weed abatement. 2.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-116 authorizing the Agency Director of Administrative Services to amend the FY2023/24 Gas Tax Operating Budget Revenue and Expenditures by $464,340 for right-of-way clean-up services and weed abatement; and 3.Authorize the Agency Director of Administrative Services to issue a purchase order not to exceed the amount of $1,014,340. RESULT: APPROVED AGREEMENT AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2023-116 [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander        Packet Page. 95 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 9 13.Co­Applicant for Round 5 Transformative Climate Communities Program Grant Funding (Ward 1, Ward 2) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1.Authorize the Interim City Manager, or designee, to submit an application as a co- applicant of the Housing Authority of San Bernardino County to the Round 5 Transformative Climate Communities Program for the Arrowhead Grove Redevelopment Project; and 2.Authorize the Interim City Manager, or designee, to enter into a partnership agreement as part of the application process detailing the collaborative stakeholder structure, and signing subsequent, necessary, and related documents to implement the agreement. RESULT: APPROVED SUBMITTING THE GRANT APPLICATION [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 14.Approve the Purchase of Handheld Transceiver Radios from Motorola Solutions for Code Enforcement Officers Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1.Authorize the City Manager to approve a Goods Purchasing Agreement with Motorola Solutions, Inc.; and 2.Authorize the Agency Director of Administrative Services to issue a purchase order in the amount of $130,164.29 for Handheld Transceiver Radios for Code Enforcement Officers. RESULT: APPROVED THE AGREEMENT [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 15.Imposing Liens on Certain Real Property to Recover Costs for Code Enforcement Abatements of Public Nuisance Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2023-115, imposing liens on certain real property located within the City of San Bernardino to recover costs for Code Enforcement abatement of public nuisance.        Packet Page. 96 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 10 RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2023-115 [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 16.Resolution and Amendment to the California Department of Housing and Community Development Standard Agreement for Permanent Local Housing Allocation Funds Spending Plan and Allocations (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1.Adopt Resolution 2023 -097 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, amending Resolution 2020-92, as required by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, authorizing the Director of Community Housing and Economic Development, and the Deputy Director of Housing and Homelessness to execute the Permanent Local Allocation Program documents, and amending the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Funds Section 302 (c)(4) plan; and 2.Authorize termination of the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program Subrecipient Agreement between the City of San Bernardino and Step Up on Second Street, Inc. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2023-097 AND AUTHORIZED TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 17.Fiscal Year 2023­24 Special Tax Levies for Previously Formed Community Facilities Districts (Wards 3 and 5) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-098 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Levying Special Taxes to be Collected During Fiscal Year 2023-24 to Pay the Annual Cost of Public Safety Services and Administrative Expenses within Community Facilities District No. 2018-1 (Safety Services) of the City of San Bernardino; 2.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-099 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Levying Special Taxes to be Collected During Fiscal Year 2023 -24 to Pay for Facilities or to Pay Principal and Interest on Bonds and Administrative Expenses within Community Facilities District No 2018-2 (Verdemont Ranch) of the City of San Bernardino; 3.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-100 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California Levying Special Taxes to be Collected During Fiscal Year 2023- 24 to Pay the Annual Cost of Maintenance Services and Administrative Expenses within Community Facilities District No. 2019-1        Packet Page. 97 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 11 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino; 4.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-101 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Levying Special Taxes to be Collected During Fiscal Year 2023 -24 to Pay for Facilities or to Pay Principal and Interest on Bonds and Administrative Expenses within Community Facilities District No. 2020-1 (Rancho Palma) of the City of San Bernardino; 5.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-102 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Levying Special Taxes to be Collected During Fiscal Year 2023 -24 to pay for Facilities or to Pay Principal and Interest on Bonds and Administrative Expenses within Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Ferree Street) of the City of San Bernardino; and 6.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-103 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Levying Special Taxes to be Collected During Fiscal Year 2023 -24 to Pay for Facilities or to Pay Principal and Interest on Bonds and Administrative Expenses within Community Facilities District No. 2022-2 (Palm) of the City of San Bernardino. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NOs. 2023-098, 2023-099, 2023-100, 2023-101, 2023-102, AND 2023-103 [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 18.Approval of Commercial and Payroll Disbursements (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California approve the commercial and payroll disbursements for June 2023. RESULT: APPROVED DISBURSEMENTS [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 19.Appropriation of AQMD Funds for Vanpool Program (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Authorize the Agency Director of Administrative Services to appropriate a total of $37,000 using the AB2788 Air Quality fund; and, 2.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-104 authorizing the Agency Director of Administrative Services to amend the FY 2022/23 and FY 2023/24 Operating Budget by $13,000 and $24,000, respectively.        Packet Page. 98 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 12 RESULT: APPROVED FUNDS FOR VANPOOL PROGRAM [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 20.Review of Administrative Budget Transfers (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, review and file all listed administrative budget transfers from April 1, 2023 through June 30, 2023. RESULT: APPROVED BUDGET TRANSFERS [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 21.Authorize the issuance of purchase orders for the on­going maintenance and support services for annual software and hardware usage fees with Atel Communications, Solutions Simplified for DocuSign Software Services, Tyler Technologies, Granicus, Harris Computers, NPA and Verizon. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, authorize the Agency Director of Administrative Services to execute the ongoing purchase orders for Annual Usage Fees, Software Maintenance, and Hardware Maintenance with Atel Communications, Solutions Simplified for DocuSign Software Services, Tyler Technologies, Granicus, Harris Computers, NPA Computers, and Verizon for a combined total not to exceed $1,197,572.69. RESULT: APPROVED PURCHASE ORDERS [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 22.2022­2025 Retired and Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP) – 2nd year of a 3­year Grant Award (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-105 approving a continuation of submitted budget application for year two of a three-year grant through the National and Community Services Retired and Senior Volunteer Program; and 2.Authorize the City Manager to accept the grant award in the amount of $54,809; and,        Packet Page. 99 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 13 3.Authorize the Agency Director of Administrative services to amend the budget to appropriate the grant funds for the period of April 1, 2023, through March 31, 2024. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2023-105 AND ACCEPTED THE GRANT AWARD [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 23.Accept 2021 Homeland Security Grant (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-106 authorizing the City Manager to accept the 2021 Homeland Security Grant Program funds; and, 2.Authorize the Agency Director of Administrative Services to amend the Fiscal Year 2023/24 Adopted Budget revenue and expenditures by $41,111. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2023-106 [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 24.Authorize Agreement with Law Enforcement Medical Services (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, authorize the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Law Enforcement Medical Services, Inc. and authorize an annual Purchase Order in the amount of $100,000 effective July 1st, 2023. RESULT: APPROVED THE AGREEMENT [7-0] MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander DISCUSSION 25.Regional Housing Trust Letter of Intent Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council approves the City joining the San Bernardino Regional Housing Trust, a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) formed among cities within the San Bernardino County Region to gain competitiveness and improve financial viability so that the City can increase affordable housing developments.        Packet Page. 100 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 14 Assistant City Manager Edelia Eveland announced that this item was being pulled from the agenda. RESULT: ITEM NO. 25 WAS PULLED BY STAFF AND WILL BE CONSIDERED AT A FUTURE MEETING. 26.American Rescue Plan Update (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1.Reallocate $1,560,000 of funds from the Water Lead Service Connector Program and commit $8,440,000 in additional American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds for a total of $10,000,000 to IT infrastructure and the City’s Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system; 2.Adopt Resolution No. 2023-107 authorizing the Agency Director of Administrative Services to amend the FY 2022/23-2023/24 Biennial Budget by $8,440,000 in American Rescue Plan funds; and 3.Receive and file this update on the ARP funds allocation, spending opportunities, investments and spending to date. Mary Alvarez Gomez, Grants Division Manager, and Agency Director of Administrative Services Barbara Whitehorn provided a presentation to the Mayor and City Council. There was a consensus by the City Council to vote on each element of the staff recommendation separately. Staff Recommendation No. 1: The $1,560,000 reallocation from the Water Lead Service Connector Program will be re- presented to the Mayor and City Council on August 16, 2023. The Mayor and City Council requested the lead connector safety report from the San Bernardino Water Department prior to deciding on the reallocation of those funds. RESULT: APPROVED THE COMMITMENT OF $8,440,000 IN AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT (ARPA) FUNDS TO INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (I.T.) INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE CITY’S ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING (ERP) SYSTEM. THE REALLOCATION OF $1,560,000 OF FUNDS FOR THE WATER LEAD SERVICE CONNECTOR PROGRAM IS ON HOLD, PENDING MORE INFORMATION FROM THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT. MOVER:Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander        Packet Page. 101 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 15 Staff Recommendation No. 2: The resolution was adopted to execute the action recommended in recommendation No. 1. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2023­107 AUTHORIZING THE AGENCY DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES TO AMEND THE FY 2022/23­2023/24 BIENNIAL BUDGET BY $8,440,000 IN AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN FUNDS MOVER:Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER:Sandra Ibarra, Council Member, Ward 2 AYES:Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander Staff Recommendation No. 3: The Mayor and City Council received and filed the report and discussed different amounts of Premium Pay for staff members using ARPA funds. Council Member Sanchez made a motion to offer a one-time Premium Payment of $3,500 to all employees, whether full-time or part-time. The motion was seconded by Council Member Alexander. A substitute motion was made by Council Member Reynoso, to provide a one-time Premium Payment of $5,000 to all full-time employees, including the Water Department, and $3,500 to all part-time employees. RESULT: DIRECTED STAFF TO ISSUE A ONE-TIME PAYMENT OF $5,000 TO FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES, AND $2,500 TO PART-TIME EMPLOYEES WHO WORKED AT ANY TIME DURING THE DECLARED PANDEMIC OF MARCH 13, 2020 THROUGH MAY 5, 2023 [4-3] MOVER:Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 SECONDER:Kimberly Calvin, Council Member, Ward 6 AYES:Figueroa, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES:Theodore Sanchez, Sandra Ibarra, Fred Shorett There was additional discussion regarding how the remaining American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds should be spent, including micro grants, rental assistance, and parks and recreation improvements. Staff will bring all the discussed items back for consideration by the Mayor and City Council at a future meeting. 27.Concept Plan Approval for Seccombe Lake Park Revitalization Project (Ward1) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approve the concept plans prepared for Seccombe Lake Park Revitalization Project and direct staff to proceed with final design for the project.        Packet Page. 102 Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 16 Acting City Engineer Susan Pan provided a presentation of the concept design for Seccombe Lake. Council Member Sanchez briefly left the dais prior to the vote being taken for this item. RESULT: APPROVED THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR SECCOMBE LAKE PARK AND DIRECTED STAFF TO PROCEED WITH FINAL DESIGN [6-0] MOVER:Sandra Ibarra, Council Member, Ward 2 SECONDER:Kimberly Calvin, Council Member, Ward 6 AYES:Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander ABSENT:Theodore Sanchez Item Numbers 28 and 29 were Public Hearings, re-ordered by Mayor Tran to be heard earlier in the meeting. ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR FUTURE MEETINGS 30.San Bernardino Regional Housing Trust (All Wards) - Council Member Alexander Council Member Alexander stated that this item was related to Item No. 25 on this agenda, and it was already being worked on. He withdrew his request for future consideration. RESULT: NO ACTION TAKEN MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL UPDATES/REPORTS ON CONFERENCES/MEETINGS At this time, the Mayor and City Council provided updates to the community. Updates included community events, Sizzling Summer Nights, Movies in the Park, and cooling centers open during summer power outages. ADJOURNMENT The meeting of the Mayor and City Council was adjourned on Thursday, July 20, 2023, at 12:16 a.m. The next joint regular meeting of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency will be held on Wednesday, August 2, 2023, in the Council Chamber located at 555 West 6th Street, San Bernardino, California 92410.Closed Session will begin at 5:30 p.m. Open Session will begin at 7:00 p.m. By: ____________        Packet Page. 103 City of San Bernardino 201 North E Street San Bernardino, CA 92401 http://www.sbcity.org DRAFT MINUTES For The Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency, Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Acting as the Successor Housing Agency to the Redevelopment Agency, Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Acting as the Housing Authority, and Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Acting as the San Bernardino Joint Powers Financing Authority WEDNESDAY, JULY 3, 2024 3:00 PM Closed Session was called to order at 3:01 PM by Mayor Helen Tran on Wednesday, July 3, 2024, at Feldheym Central Library, San Bernardino, CA. CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Late 3:03 PM Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Late 3:03 PM Juan Figueroa Council Member, Ward 3 Late 3:02 PM Fred Shorett Mayor Pro-Tem,, Ward 4 Present Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Present Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Present Damon L Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Present Helen Tran Mayor Present Rochelle Clayton Acting City Manager Present Sonia Carvalho City Attorney Present Genoveva Rocha Chief Deputy City Clerk Present Courtney Bowen Deputy City Clerk Present Mayor Helen Tran Council Members Theodore Sanchez Sandra Ibarra Juan Figueroa Fred Shorett Ben Reynoso Kimberly Calvin Damon L. Alexander        Packet Page. 104 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 2 3:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENT Treasure Ortiz commented about Item A(v.). She stated that the City Council should stop lying about the investigation and ask more questions. CLOSED SESSION (A) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ­ EXISTING LITIGATION (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) and (d)(1): i. Juanita Martinez v. The Home Depot, et al., San Bernardino Superior Court, Case No. CIVDS1936862 ii. Gary Saenz, et al. v. City of San Bernardino, et al., San Bernardino Superior Court, Case No. CIVDS2003802 iii. Tyson et al. v. City of San Bernardino, et al., United States District Court, Central District Case No. 5:23-cv-01539 TJH (KKx) iv. Sharon Bailey v. City of San Bernardino, et al., San Bernardino Superior Court, Case No. CIVSB2216529 v. Steve Carrigan v. City of San Bernardino and Kimberly Calvin, Superior Court of the County of San Bernardino Case No. CIV SB 2419810 Item (B) was continued to the July 17th meeting. (B) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)): i. Notice of Claim, Asa Carraway, dated January 12, 2024, Claim No.GHC0066973 (C) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS i. Property: 300 North E Street (Parcel Map 688, Parcel 12 Book 25 Page 47 Parcel Map 688 Parcel No. 12 formally known as City PTN Blk 12 and PTN 3rd St VAC) City Negotiator: City Manager or Designee Negotiating Parties: El Corte Ingles Under Negotiations: Price and Terms of Exclusive Negotiating Agreement ii. Property: Lutheran Social Services Site, 1354 N. G Street, San Bernardino, CA 92405 (APN 0145-193-07, 08, 10, and 22) City Negotiator: City Manager or Designee Negotiating Parties: Lutheran Social Services Under Negotiations: Price and Terms of Easement 5:00 P.M. The Regular Meeting was called to order at 5:21 PM by Mayor Tran on Wednesday, July 3, 2024.        Packet Page. 105 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 3 Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Present Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Late 5:23 PM Juan Figueroa Mayor Pro-Tem, Ward 3 Late 5:23 PM Fred Shorett Council Member, Ward 4 Present Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Present Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Present Damon L Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Present Helen Tran Mayor Present Rochelle Clayton Acting City Manager Present Sonia Carvalho City Attorney Present Genoveva Rocha City Clerk Present Courtney Bowen Deputy City Clerk Present INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Pastor August Smith from Truelight Community Fellowship led the invocation, and Council Member Reynoso led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Sonia Carvalho stated that there was direction given to staff on various cases but there was no reportable action from Closed Session. At this time, the agenda was re­ordered, and Presentations, Appointments, and Public Hearings were heard before Public Comments. PRESENTATIONS 1. Proclamation for Parks and Recreation Month in the City of San Bernardino – July 2024 (All Wards) Mayor Tran presented the Proclamation to various Parks and Recreation staff members. APPOINTMENTS 2. Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission Appointment of Travon Martin (Mayor’s Appointment) (All Wards) Mayor Tran presented the certificate to Travon Martin. City Clerk Rocha administered the oath of office. RESULT: APPROVED THE APPOINTMENT (8­0) MOVER: Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander, Mayor Tran NOES: None        Packet Page. 106 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 4 PUBLIC HEARING 3. Appeal 24­02 of Appeal 24­01 for Development Permit Type­D 21­18, 19, 20, and 21 (Ward 3) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California take the following action: adopt Resolution No. 2024-145 denying Appeal 24-02, thereby upholding the Planning Commission’s denial of Appeal 24-01 for Development Permit Type-D 21-18, 19, 20, and 21, which upholds the Development and Environmental Review Committee’s (DERC) adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration in conjunction with the approval of Development Permit Type-D 21-18, 19, 20, and 21, allowing the development and establishment of five (5) service commercial buildings totaling approximately 67,451 square feet on several APNs for a combined 5.81 acres within the Commercial Regional (CR-3) zone. Mayor Tran opened the Public Hearing at 5:35 PM. Director of Community Development and Housing Gabriel Elliott announced that the Public Hearing needed to be continued to August 21, 2024. RESULT: CONTINUED THE PUBLIC HEARING TO AUGUST 21, 2024 [7­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Sandra Ibarra, Council Member, Ward 2 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS LISTED AND NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Jim Smith thanked Parks and Recreation Director Lydie Gutfeld for her wonderful work in the parks. He wished everyone a Happy Independence Day, and gave updates on his organization, Native Sons of the Golden West. Lynne Wear shared upcoming Neighborhood Association events and activities. Leonard Mayes asked that the street vendors near his home be removed. Lydia Savala suggested that the City utilize contract veterinarians and use the mobile vet unit as it was intended. Robert Porter spoke about the book he wrote about local art and history in San Bernardino. Mike Hartley commented about Code Enforcement and illegal parking. Georgia Lykouretzos stated that the animal shelter needs to be better prepared to handle incoming animals.        Packet Page. 107 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 5 Fay Aldridge encouraged everyone to get involved with their local neighborhood association. Treasure Ortiz spoke about Downtown Redevelopment, homelessness, and transparency. Junior Carrillo commended Parks and Recreation Director Gutfeld, Police Lieutenant Luna, President of the Belvedere Neighborhood Association Doug Wheeler, and Burrtec Industries for the good they do in the community. Malibu advised that she was against the Burrtec contact renewal initially, but now she supports it due to the requirements being imposed by the State, not the City. Dolores Armstead congratulated Parks and Recreation for their accomplishments. She also stated she attended a Community Stakeholders meeting on June 26th and received informative updates on the Downtown Specific Plan and the General Plan. “Less” spoke about council meetings starting early, Council Members being held accountable, and past history of City Managers. Luis Ojeda stated that he is happy with the Community Development department because they are helping the business community. He also commented that Burrtec does a lot of work in the City and they don’t talk about it. Deanie Gallaher offered her appreciation to elected officials, staff and the new Acting City Manager. She also thanked San Bernardino County Fire Department Chief Munsey and Assistant Chief Yeager for their work in the City. At this time, City Clerk Rocha announced that written correspondence had also been received from Sean Kelly, President of the Perris Hill Neighborhood Association and this written correspondence was added to the online agenda backup. CITY MANAGER UPDATE Public Information Officer Jeff Kraus gave an update. Highlights included the opening of Diamond Chevrolet, arrival of the first “Zero Emission” train in San Bernardino, and the recent Pet Adoption Week at the Animal Shelter. CONSENT CALENDAR Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and are voted on in a single motion unless a council or staff member has pulled the item for more discussion.        Packet Page. 108 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 6 RESULT: APPROVED THE CONSENT CALENDAR; PULLED ITEMS NO. 9 AND NO. 10 FOR A SEPARATE VOTE [7­0] MOVER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 4. Approval of Various Mayor and City Council Meeting Minutes Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve the minutes for the following meeting dates: 1. May 18, 2022, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 2. May 15, 2024, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [7­0] MOVER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 5. Imposing Liens on Certain Real Property to Recover Costs for Code Enforcement Abatements (All Wards) Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2024-144 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, imposing liens on certain real property located within the City San Bernardino for the cost recovery of public nuisance abatements. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­144 [7­0] MOVER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 6. Investment Portfolio Report for April 2024 (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, accept and file the Monthly Investment Portfolio Report for April 2024.        Packet Page. 109 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 7 RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [7­0] MOVER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 7. Approval of Commercial and Payroll Disbursements (All Wards) p. 535 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California approve the commercial and payroll disbursements for May 2024. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [7­0] MOVER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 8. Professional Services Agreements for Workers' Compensation Legal Services (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, authorize the City Manager or designee to execute professional services agreements with the Hanna, Brophy, MacLean, McAleer & Jensen, Black & Rose and Goldman, Magdalin & Straatsma for Workers' Compensation Legal Services. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [7­0] MOVER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 9. Agreement with Selman Chevrolet and West Coast Lights and Sirens for vehicle purchase and build out (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, authorize the following: 1. The City Manager or designee, to execute a Goods Purchasing Agreement with Selman Chevrolet. 2. The Director of Finance and Management Services issue a purchase order to Selman Chevrolet in an amount not to exceed $115,770.38. 3. The Director of Finance and Management Services issue a purchase order to West Coast Lights and Sirens Inc., in an amount not to exceed $20,976.98. Council Member Calvin pulled this item for further discussion. She stated that Selman        Packet Page. 110 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 8 Chevrolet is in Orange County and asked why a dealership within the City of San Bernardino was not chosen for this contract. She also asked that the procurement details be included in the agenda packet in the future. Acting City Manager Clayton advised that she would attempt to answer the question, because Chief Goodman was not available. She advised that typically the procurement/request for proposal process is followed, which awards the contract to the lowest bidder. She informed the Council that she would look into the matter and provide an answer at a later time. At this time, Council Member Ibarra made a motion to continue the item to the next regular Mayor and City Council meeting, in order to allow time for a response. The motion was seconded by Council Member Alexander. Council Member Sanchez made a substitute motion to approve staff’s recommendation. He advised that he trusted staff to make decisions, and he did not want to delay the item since it was for police vehicles. There was a second by Mayor Pro Tem Shorett. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None *Acting City Manager Clayton later confirmed that the vendor was chosen because they were the lowest bidder, and because they had the inventory in stock that other vendors did not. 10. Resolution List of Projects under SB1 2024/2025 Road Maintenance Program; and Authorizing the Director of Finance to Amend the FY 2024/25 Capital Improvement Plan, Recording Supplemental Appropriations (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-146 approving the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation proposed project list for submittal to the California Transportation Commission and adopting a list of projects for Fiscal Year 2024/25 to be funded by Senate Bill 1: Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017; and 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-147 authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2024/25 Capital Improvement Plan, recording supplemental appropriations: In the amount of $5,787,126.00 in SB1 Fund and $1,355,877.50 in Gas Tax Fund, for a total additional appropriation of $7,143,003.50 for Street Rehabilitation Phase 1- 14 Locations Project (Project No. 13630).        Packet Page. 111 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 9 There was discussion amongst the City Council and staff regarding how the list of projects was formulated, as well as including Ward numbers where the streets are located in future reports. Council Member Sanchez asked that Orange St. from the North end at Piedmont to the South end at Highland be added to the list. He stated that both streets to the North and South of this section of Orange St. were part of the list to be repaired, and therefore Orange St. should be added as well. He advised that this segment is crucial for safety reasons, and there should be funds leftover in the SB1 account to cover the cost. Acting City Manager Clayton advised that funding is limited, so other projects would have to be removed for others to be added. Acting Manager Clayton advised that the recommendations from Council Member Sanchez and others could be agendized for a future meeting but would not be included in the current item’s recommendation. Council Members asked staff to consider various streets for either amendment to the current list, or future consideration for repair. City Engineer Azzam Jabsheh advised that the list of projects had already been sent to the State of California, and he did not know if it was able to be amended. City Engineer Jabsheh advised that he would ask CalTrans if amendments to the list can be made. If not, there were possible excess funds from a different project that may be available for additional street repair projects. Council Member Sanchez made a motion to add Orange St. to the current approved list of projects. There was no support for the motion. Council Member Ibarra made a substitute motion to approve staff’s recommendation and direct staff to assess all Council recommendations for future street repairs. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NOS. 2024­146 AND 2024­147, AND DIRECTED STAFF TO ASSESS COUNCIL MEMBERS’ RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STREET REPAIRS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION [5­2] MOVER: Sandra Ibarra, Council Member, Ward 2 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Ibarra, Figueroa, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: Sanchez, Shorett 11. Award of Agreement for Construction of the Cross Street Bridge Replacement and Fairfax Elementary School Playground Restoration (Ward 2) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution 2024-148:        Packet Page. 112 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 10 1. Approving the award of an Agreement with Jilk Heavy Construction, Inc. in the amount of $2,945,503.50 for Cross Street Bridge Replacement and Fairfax Elementary School Playground Restoration (Project); and 2. Authorizing the construction contingencies, construction management, and administrative costs in the total amount of $467,440.78 for construction of the Project; and 3. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2023/24 CIP budget with an additional $2,700,000 from the General Fund to bring the total project budget to $3,412,944.28; and 4. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute all documents with Jilk Heavy Construction, Inc.; and 5. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to expend the contingency fund, if necessary, to complete the project. 6. Finding the Project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines § 15302 (“Replacement or Reconstruction”). RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­148 [7­0] MOVER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 12. Award of Agreement for Construction of Speicher Park­ East Side Skate Park (Ward 2) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution 2024-149: 1. Approving the award of an Agreement with Grindline Skate Parks, Inc. in the amount of $1,031,932.88 for Speicher Park- East Side Skate Park (Project); and 2. Authorizing the construction contingencies, construction management, and administrative costs in the total amount of $155,847.12 for construction of the Project; and 3. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2024/25 CIP budget with an additional $415,000 from the AB 1600 Parkland and Op Fund to bring the total project budget to $1,187,780.00; and 4. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute all documents with Grindline Skate Parks Inc.; and 5. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to expend the contingency fund, if necessary, to complete the project.        Packet Page. 113 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 11 6. Finding the Project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines § 15302 (“Replacement or Reconstruction”). RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­149 [7­0] MOVER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 13. Relinquishment of Dement Street (Ward 5) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution No. 2024-150, accepting title, control, and maintenance of a reconstructed portion of Dement Street upon relinquishment by the State of California and receipt of written notices from the State that work thereon has been completed. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­150 [7­0] MOVER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None DISCUSSION 14. Adopt Resolution Establishing the Homeless Initiatives Ad Hoc Sub­ Committee (All Wards) Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2024-141 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, establishing the Homeless Initiatives Ad Hoc Sub-Committee. Acting City Manager Clayton provided a staff report. She stated that this sub-committee will help with the homeless emergency in the City. It would also create an opportunity for items related to homelessness to be vetted by the Committee before coming before the Mayor and City Council. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­141 [7­0] MOVER: Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 SECONDER: Sandra Ibarra, Council Member, Ward 2 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 15. Consideration of the Third Amendment to the City’s Exclusive Franchise Agreement for Integrated Solid Waste Collection, Processing and        Packet Page. 114 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 12 Disposal Services with Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc. (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-111; 1. Approving the Third Amendment to the City’s Exclusive Franchise Agreement for Integrated Solid Waste Collection, Processing and Disposal Services with Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc. Acting City Manager Clayton provided information regarding the amendment. She stated that Burrtec had an option in their original contract to have the option to increase residential rates every year, but Burrtec has offered to keep the current rates as they are during the duration of the proposed five-year extension. Council Members discussed the “green waste”/SB 1383 requirements, commercial solid waste rates, and Senior Citizen discount collection rates. Council Member Shorett stated he would support the item, but he was not happy with the lengthy process. Council Member Calvin made a motion to approve the amendment and add a stipulation that the City will be required to conduct an RFP (Request for Proposals) for solid waste collection services at the end of the contract period. Council Member Figueroa seconded the motion. Mike Arreguin from Burrtec provided information regarding the agreement, including the introduction of a 10% discount for seniors and a 5% cap on any CPI (Consumer Price Index) increases. Council Member Sanchez made a motion to approve staff’s recommendation with no stipulation for a future RFP. There was a second by Council Member Alexander. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­111 [6­1] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Calvin, Alexander NOES: Reynoso MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL UPDATES/REPORTS ON CONFERENCES & MEETINGS At this time, the Mayor and City Council provided city-wide updates. Highlights included wishing the community a Happy Independence Day and reminders about firework safety. ADJOURNMENT The meeting of the Mayor and City Council was adjourned on Wednesday, July 3, 2024, at 7:41 PM, in memory of Public Works employee Guadalupe “Lulu” Villareal, who passed away. A moment of silence was observed in her honor.        Packet Page. 115 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 3, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 13 The next joint regular meeting of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency will be held on Wednesday, July 17, 2024, in the Council Chamber located at 555 West 6th Street, San Bernardino, California 92410. Closed Session will begin at 4:00 p.m. and Open Session will begin at 5:00 p.m. By:_________________________ Genoveva Rocha, CMC        Packet Page. 116 City of San Bernardino 201 North E Street San Bernardino, CA 92401 http://www.sbcity.org DRAFT MINUTES For The Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency, Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Acting as the Successor Housing Agency to the Redevelopment Agency, Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Acting as the Housing Authority, and Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Acting as the San Bernardino Joint Powers Financing Authority WEDNESDAY, JULY 17, 2024 4:00 PM Closed Session was called to order at 4:04 PM by Mayor Helen Tran on Wednesday, July 17, 2024, at Feldheym Central Library, San Bernardino, CA. CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Present Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Present Juan Figueroa Council Member, Ward 3 Present Fred Shorett Mayor Pro-Tem, Ward 4 Late 4:07 p.m. Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Late 4:05 p.m. Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Present Damon L Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Present Helen Tran Mayor Present Rochelle Clayton Acting City Manager Present Sonia Carvalho City Attorney Present Genoveva Rocha Chief Deputy City Clerk Present Courtney Bowen Deputy City Clerk Present Mayor Helen Tran Council Members Theodore Sanchez Sandra Ibarra Juan Figueroa Fred Shorett Ben Reynoso Kimberly Calvin Damon L. Alexander        Packet Page. 117 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 17, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 2 4:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENT Harry Hatch spoke about Item C(i). He stated that there was a fire at the property in question on July 8th, 2024. He asked that the fire damage be taken into consideration when discussing the purchase of the “Harris Building”, and for the City to walk away from the purchase. Treasure Ortiz also spoke about Item C(i). She also asked that the Mayor and City Council consider the possible fire damage when discussing this item. She also commented about item A(iii). She asked for more details regarding the investigation involving Steve Carrigan and Council Member Calvin. Kimberly Calvin stated that she was commenting as a resident of San Bernardino. She does not support settling the claim with Steve Carrigan. She asked that the City release the entire report of the investigation into the matter rather than just a portion of it. The Mayor and City Council convened into Closed Session at 4:10 PM. CLOSED SESSION A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ­ EXISTING LITIGATION (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) and (d)(1): i. Dennis Han v. City of San Bernardino, Workers’ Compensation Case Nos. AJ6020285, ADJ16136996, ADJ10816736, and ADJ10816740 ii. David Green v. City of San Bernardino, Workers’ Compensation Case Nos. ADJ16318214 and ADJ16318215 iii. Steve Carrigan v. City of San Bernardino and Kimberly Calvin, Superior Court of the County of San Bernardino Case No. CIVSB 2419810 B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)): i. Notice of Claim, Asa Carraway, dated January 12, 2024, Claim No. GHC0066973. C. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 i. Property: 300 North E Street (Parcel Map 688, Parcel 12 Book 25 Page 47 Parcel Map 688 Parcel No. 12 formally known as City PTN Blk 12 and PTN 3rd St VAC) City Negotiator: City Manager or Designee Negotiating Parties: El Corte Ingles Under Negotiations: Price and Terms of Exclusive Negotiating Agreement ii. Property: 1750 S. Waterman Avenue (APN 0141-412-48-0- 000) City Negotiator: City Manager or Designee Negotiating Parties: Jay Ashree Krishna, Inc. Under Negotiations: Price and Terms of Exclusive Negotiating Agreement        Packet Page. 118 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 17, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 3 5:00 P.M. The Regular Meeting was called to order at 5:38 PM by Mayor Helen Tran on Wednesday, July 17, 2024, at Feldheym Central Library, San Bernardino, CA Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Present Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Present Juan Figueroa Mayor Pro-Tem, Ward 3 Present Fred Shorett Council Member, Ward 4 Present Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Present Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Present Damon L Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Present Helen Tran Mayor Present Rochelle Clayton Acting City Manager Present Sonia Carvalho City Attorney Present Genoveva Rocha City Clerk Present Courtney Bowen Deputy City Clerk Present INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chaplain Nelson Glass from the San Bernardino Police Department led the invocation, and Council Member Alexander led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Sonia Carvalho stated that there was no reportable action from Closed Session. She also advised that the Mayor and City Council would reconvene to Closed Session to discuss Item A iii after Open Session. APPOINTMENTS 1. Measure S Citizens Oversight Committee Appointment of Stacia Olivas (Mayor’s Appointment) 2. Animal Commission Appointment of Jodi R. Kroeger (Ward 4) There was consensus amongst the Mayor and City Council to conduct one vote for both appointments. RESULT: APPROVED BOTH APPOINTMENTS [8­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander, and Mayor Tran NOES: None Mayor Tran and Mayor Pro Tem Shorett presented the appointments, and City Clerk Rocha administered the Oaths of Office.        Packet Page. 119 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 17, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 4 At this time, Mayor Tran re-ordered the agenda and stated that Item No. 4 would be heard at or after the time it was noticed of 7:00 PM. PUBLIC HEARING 3. Proposed Fourth Substantial Amendment to Fiscal Years 2020­2021 Annual Action Plan Associated with Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus Relief Funds (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Conduct a public hearing to obtain citizens’ comments on the proposed Fourth Substantial Amendments to the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan for the Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus Relief Funds; and 2. Approve the Substantial Amendment to Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan for the Community Development Block Grant; and 3. Approve the Technical Correction and Adopt Resolution No. 2024-157; and authorize the Director of Finance to amend the Fiscal Year 2024/25 Operating Budget with an appropriation of $316,992.70 to both revenues and expenditures in accordance with the Fourth Substantial Amendment to the 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan; and 4. Authorize the City Manager or designee to take any further actions and execute any further agreements or documents as necessary to effectuate the submittal of the Proposed Substantial Amendments to Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan. Mayor Tran announced that Item No. 3 was being removed from the agenda by staff and would be brought forward again at a future meeting. RESULT: NO ACTION WAS TAKEN; ITEM WAS PULLED BY STAFF 5. Public Hearing and Resolution Confirming Assessments for Delinquent Solid Waste Collection Service Charges on the Property Tax Roll for Fiscal Year 2024­25 (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution 2024-169, authorizing the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, to adopt the report proposing to have delinquent solid waste collection service charges collected on the tax roll. Mayor Tran opened the Public Hearing at 5:44 PM. Public Works Director Lynn Merrill provided a presentation. He advised that this item is an annual process that occurs pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 8.24.050(E). Notices were sent to the affected property owners. There was one public comment:        Packet Page. 120 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 17, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 5 Javier Sombrano, accountant for Club Trinidad, stated that the club has been paying their solid waste collection bill every month so they should not be on the delinquency list. Director Merrill advised the resident that he could meet with Burrtec staff located in the library lobby to resolve his issue. The Public Hearing was closed at 5:52 PM. Council Member Figueroa advised that some solid waste accounts may have become delinquent if they use Online Bill Pay and the payment address is not updated. He also asked that in the future, staff provide addresses in the staff report in addition to the APN (Assessor’s Parcel Number). Director Merrill encouraged anyone who experienced a problem paying their bill to contact Burrtec to get a resolution. He also stated he would provide the address information of the delinquent accounts to the mayor and city council within the coming weeks. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­169 [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None CITY MANAGER UPDATE Public Information Officer Jeff Kraus provided community updates. Highlights included the new San Bernardino mural at the Hernandez Community Center, the introduction of new Economic Development Director Ken Chapa, and recent new business Ribbon Cuttings. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS LISTED AND NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Treasure Ortiz spoke in support of the new Director Ken Chapa. She inquired about an update on housing and the General Plan. She asked that the Mayor and City Council allow the commissions and committees to meet regularly. Carmen Gallegos commented about overgrown trees being a fire danger and spoke against illegal dumping. Al Palazzo stated that he applied for the Economic Development Director position with the City and would also like to be considered for the City Manager position. He asked that the Mayor and City Council listen to his ideas about developing the City. Selina asked how residents are going to be made aware of the new Animal Services voucher program. She also encouraged the Animal Control Commission to begin meeting again.        Packet Page. 121 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 17, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 6 Dolores Armstead spoke about a General Plan update, status of the “Oxbow” project, truck parking in the City, and a moratorium on warehouses. Robert Porter asked for street sweeping signs and parking enforcement. Jose Mendoza, commander for Disabled American Veterans Chapter 12, thanked the Mayor and City Council for allowing him to be the keynote speaker at the Memorial Day Event. He provided updates about Chapter events within the community. Jim Smith spoke about the new mural at the Hernandez center. He asked that the Charter Review Committee be reactivated. He complimented staff, Mayor Tran, and Council Member Alexander for their work in the community. Mike Hartley asked that the senior discount for solid waste collection bills be raised to 25%. He spoke in support of law enforcement for illegally parked vehicles. Gina Mirelez, President and Founder of Mexican Americans Advocating for Students, spoke about the organization’s upcoming event on July 27th at the Feldheym Library. She also requested that the fee they paid for the event be waived. She also requested an Ordinance regarding domestic terrorism. (This speaker also provided supplemental information that was added to the online agenda backup.) Pamela Hall requested resources to help her assist stray animals. She stated that the Animal Shelter is inadequate. She asked for a status update on the Spay and Neuter partnership with The Paw Mission. Lydia Savala spoke about the needs of animals in the community. She informed about the H1V Visa Program that would allow the City to hire a qualified vet from a different country. Georgia Lykouretzos commented about grants the City has received and the condition of the Animal Shelter. Sharon Negrete stated that she was present at the meeting to serve 1st and 4th Ward Council Members Sanchez and Shorett with an Intent to Circulate a Recall Petition, pursuant to California Election Code 11020. She also commented about the lack of an Animal Shelter veterinarian. Luis Ojeda stated that San Bernardino is known as dysfunctional due to the actions of the elected officials. He spoke against the proposed intent to recall. He commented that a recall does not move the City forward. At this time, City Clerk Rocha announced that written correspondence had also been received from Adam Apesh and Jacqueline Silvestry and these written correspondences were added to the online agenda backup. CONSENT CALENDAR Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and are voted on in a single motion unless a council or staff member has pulled the item for more discussion.        Packet Page. 122 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 17, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 7 RESULT: APPROVED THE CONSENT CALENDAR, AND PULLED ITEM NO. 12 FOR A SEPARATE VOTE [7­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 6. Approval of Various Mayor and City Council Meeting Minutes Recommendation: 1. February 21, 2024, Draft Regular and Special Meeting Minutes 2. March 20, 2024, Draft Regular Meeting Minutes 3. April 17, 2024, Draft Regular Meeting Minutes 4. June 5, 2024, Draft Regular Meeting Minutes RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [7­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 7. Adoption of Ordinance No. MC­1638 (Annexation 43 ­ Quick Quack Car Wash) (Ward 1) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Ordinance No. MC-1638 amending Ordinance No. MC-1522 and levying special taxes to be collected during Fiscal Year 2023-2024 to pay the annual costs of the maintenance and servicing of landscaping, lighting, water quality improvements, graffiti, streets, street sweeping, parks and trail maintenance, a reserve fund for capital replacement, and administrative expenses with respect to City of San Bernardino Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services). RESULT: ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. MC­1638 [7­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 8. Adoption of Ordinance No. MC­1639 (Annexation 44 ­ Everhome Suites) (Ward 3) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Ordinance No. MC-1639 amending Ordinance No. MC-1522 and levying special taxes to be collected during Fiscal Year 2023-2024 to pay the annual costs of the maintenance and servicing of landscaping, lighting, water quality        Packet Page. 123 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 17, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 8 improvements, graffiti, streets, street sweeping, parks and trail maintenance, a reserve fund for capital replacement, and administrative expenses with respect to City of San Bernardino Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services). RESULT: ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. MC­1639 [7­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 9. Adoption of Ordinance No. MC­1640 (Annexation 45 ­ GWS#8) (Ward 3) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Ordinance No. MC-1640 amending Ordinance No. MC-1522 and levying special taxes to be collected during Fiscal Year 2023-2024 to pay the annual costs of the maintenance and servicing of landscaping, lighting, water quality improvements, graffiti, streets, street sweeping, parks and trail maintenance, a reserve fund for capital replacement, and administrative expenses with respect to City of San Bernardino Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services). RESULT: ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. MC­1640 [7­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 10. Resolution Declaring Intent to Amend Special Tax Rates: Community Facilities District No. 2019­1 (Maintenance Services): Annexation No. 28, Tax Zone No. 29 (Verdemont Ranch) (Ward 5) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-152 of the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, declaring its intention to amend the Special Tax rates for Annexation No. 28 into Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino, and authorizing the levy of a special taxes therein. Council Member Figueroa asked that the Mayor and City Council should come together to support current and future traffic alleviation projects in the City. He advised that his comment pertains to both this item and Item No. 12. He specifically mentioned Palm Ave. and the I-215 Freeway. City Engineer Azzam Jabsheh informed that his staff are working on bringing a project to the Palm Ave. area.        Packet Page. 124 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 17, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 9 City Manager Clayton stated that there will be upcoming workshops regarding upcoming projects and relationships with other agencies such as San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­152 [7­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 11. Fiscal Year 2024­25 Special Tax Levies for Previously Formed Community Facilities Districts (Wards 3 and 5) P.462 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-158 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Levying Special Taxes to be Collected During Fiscal Year 2024-25 to Pay the Annual Cost of Public Safety Services and Administrative Expenses within Community Facilities District No. 2018-1 (Safety Services) of the City of San Bernardino; 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-159 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Levying Special Taxes to be Collected During Fiscal Year 2024-25 to Pay for Facilities or to Pay Principal and Interest on Bonds and Administrative Expenses within Community Facilities District No 2018-2 (Verdemont Ranch) of the City of San Bernardino; 3. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-160 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California Levying Special Taxes to be Collected During Fiscal Year 2024-25 to Pay the Annual Cost of Maintenance Services and Administrative Expenses within Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino; 4. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-161 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Levying Special Taxes to be Collected During Fiscal Year 2024-25 to Pay for Facilities or to Pay Principal and Interest on Bonds and Administrative Expenses within Community Facilities District No. 2020-1 (Rancho Palma) of the City of San Bernardino; 5. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-162 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Levying Special Taxes to be Collected During Fiscal Year 2024-25 to pay for Facilities or to Pay Principal and Interest on Bonds and Administrative Expenses within Community Facilities District No. 2021-1 (Ferree Street) of the City of San Bernardino; and 6. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-163 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Levying Special Taxes to be Collected During        Packet Page. 125 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 17, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 10 Fiscal Year 2024-25 to Pay for Facilities or to Pay Principal and Interest on Bonds and Administrative Expenses within Community Facilities District No. 2022-2 (Palm) of the City of San Bernardino. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NOs. 2024­158, 2024­159, 2024­160, 2024­161, 2024­162, AND 2024­163 [7­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None 12. Approving Amendment No. 3 to Cooperative Agreement No. 19­1002205 with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for the Interstate 215/University Parkway Interchange Project (SS04­019) (Wards 5,6) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution 2024-154: a. Authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 3 to Cooperative Agreement No. 19-1002205 with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for the Interstate 215/University Parkway Interchange Project (SS04-019); and b. Authorizing the Agency Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the Interstate 215/University Parkway Interchange Project budget in the amount of $403,743 through the Measure I (129) Fund Balance remaining Council Member Reynoso asked if this would be the final amendment to the contract. He also inquired about any upcoming public outreach regarding this project, due to the impact on traffic and the community. Paul Melocoton with SBCTA informed that this should be the last amendment, but he could not guarantee it. He also stated that public outreach will be ramping up soon, since construction will be starting soon. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­154 [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander NOES: None At this time, Item No. 4 was heard.        Packet Page. 126 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 17, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 11 4. Public Hearing on Fiscal Year 2024­25 Assessment Levies for Previously Formed Assessment Districts (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California hold public hearings and: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-164 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for Assessment District No. 1022 and Zones 1, 2 and 3 thereof for Fiscal Year 2024-25; 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-165 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for Assessment District Nos. 1017, 1019, 1020, 1023 and 1024 for Fiscal Year 2024-25; 3. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-166 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for Assessment District Nos. 1028, 1029, 1030, 1031, 1032, 1035 (ZONE 1), 1035 (ZONE 2), 1036, 1037, 1038, 1039, 1040, 1041, 1042, 1043 (ZONE 1), 1043 (ZONE 2), 1045, 1046, 1047, 1048, 1050, 1052, 1054, 1055, 1056, 1057, 1059, 1060, 10631064 and 1068 for Fiscal Year 2024-25; 4. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-167 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for Assessment District Nos. 951 (ZONE 1), 951 (ZONE 2), 952 (ZONES 1, 2 AND 2A), 952 (ZONE 3), 953, 956, 959 (ZONE 1), 962, 963, 968, 974, 975, 976, 981, 982, 986, 989, 991, 993, 997, 1001, 1002, 1005, 1007, 1012 and 1016 for Fiscal Year 2024- 25; and 5. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-168 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, Confirming the Diagram and Assessment for Assessment District Nos. 1025 and 1027 for Fiscal Year 2024-25. Mayor Tran opened the Public Hearing at 7:06 PM. There were no requests to speak. Shane Spicer with Spicer Consulting provided an oral report. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:09 PM. There were no questions or comments from the City Council. Mayor Pro Tem Shorett and Council Member Calvin were not present at the dais at the time the vote was taken. All Council Members were present for the duration of Closed Session.        Packet Page. 127 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes July 17, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 12 RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NOs 2024­164, 2024­165, 2021­166, 2024­167, AND 2024­168 [5­0] MOVER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Reynoso, Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Shorett, Calvin At the conclusion of the Public Hearing, the Mayor and City Council reconvened to Closed Session at 7:10 PM. CLOSED SESSION REPORT Assistant City Attorney Jason Baltimore advised that there was no reportable action from Closed Session. MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL UPDATES/REPORTS ON CONFERENCES & MEETINGS Council Members Sanchez, Ibarra, and Calvin provided updates to the community. Highlights included the upcoming Concert in the Park at the Roosevelt Bowl, Neighborhood Association meetings, and the National Night Out event on August 6th. ADJOURNMENT The meeting of the Mayor and City Council was adjourned on Wednesday, July 17, 2024, at 7:40 PM. The next joint regular meeting of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency will be held on Wednesday, August 7, 2024, in the Council Chamber located at 555 West 6th Street, San Bernardino, California 92410. Closed Session will begin at 4:00 p.m. and Open Session will begin at 5:00 p.m. By:________________________ Genoveva Rocha, CMC        Packet Page. 128 City of San Bernardino 201 North E Street San Bernardino, CA 92401 http://www.sbcity.org DRAFT MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR HOUSING AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SAN BERNARDINO JOINT POWERS FINANCING AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 7, 2024 3:00 PM Closed Session was called to order at 3:04 PM by Mayor Helen Tran on Wednesday, August 7, 2024, at Feldheym Central Library, San Bernardino, CA. CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Present Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Present 3:22 p.m. Juan Figueroa Mayor Pro-Tem, Ward 3 Present Fred Shorett Council Member, Ward 4 Present Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Present 3:06 p.m. Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Present Damon L. Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Present Helen Tran Mayor Present Rochelle Clayton Acting City Manager Present Sonia Carvalho City Attorney Absent Genoveva Rocha City Clerk Present Telicia Lopez Chief Deputy City Clerk Present Mayor Helen Tran Council Members Theodore Sanchez Sandra Ibarra Juan Figueroa Fred Shorett Ben Reynoso Kimberly Calvin Damon L. Alexander        Packet Page. 129 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 2 4:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENT Treasure Ortiz expressed her displeasure with the City Manager recruitment process, and the lawsuits that resulted from the process. Kimberly Calvin spoke on the fiduciary duties of the city. She spoke on allegations pertaining to her potential leak of closed session information. CLOSED SESSION A) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ­ EXISTING LITIGATION (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) and (d)(1): i.)City of San Bernardino, et al. v. Fox Property Holdings, LLC, et al., San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. CIVSB2218532 ii.)Steve Carrigan v. City of San Bernardino and Kimberly Calvin, Superior Court of the County of San Bernardino Case No. CIVSB 2419810 iii.)James Tyson, et al. v. City of San Bernardino, United States District Court Case No. 5:23-cv-01539-TJH (KKx) iv.)Gary Saenz, et al. v. City of San Bernardino, et al., San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. CIVDS2003802 v.)Aaron Ortega v. Cuauhtemoc Harvey, et al., San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. CIVSB2306518 vi.)Maria Segura, Individually and as Successor in Interest to Nicholas Segura, deceased et al. v. City of San Bernardino, United States District Court Case No. 5:22-cv-00277-JGB-SP and United States Court of Appeals for Ninth District Case No. 24-2445 vii.)Brian Lewis v. City of San Bernardino, Workers’ Compensation Case Nos. ADJ14779163 and ADJ11677581 viii.)Marco Granado v. City of San Bernardino, Workers’ Compensation Case No. ADJ15192206 ix.) Idilio Sanchez v. City of San Bernardino, Workers’ Compensation Case Nos. ADJ17648923 and ADJ17646856 B) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 i.) Property: 300 North E Street (Parcel Map 688, Parcel 12 Book 25 Page 47 Parcel Map 688 Parcel No. 12 formally known as City PTN Blk 12 and PTN 3rd St VAC) City Negotiator: City Manager or Designee Negotiating Parties: El Corte Ingles Under Negotiations: Price and Terms of Sale ii.) Property: 1750 S. Waterman Avenue (APN 0141­412­48­0­000) City Negotiator: City Manager or Designee Negotiating Parties: Jay Ashree Krishna, Inc. Under Negotiations: Price and Terms of Sale        Packet Page. 130 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 3 5:00 P.M. The Regular Meeting was called to order at 5:09 PM by Mayor Tran on Wednesday, August 7, 2024, at Feldheym Central Library, San Bernardino, CA. CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Present Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Present Juan Figueroa Mayor Pro-Tem, Ward 3 Present Fred Shorett Council Member, Ward 4 Present Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Present Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Present Damon L. Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Present Helen Tran Mayor Present Rochelle Clayton Acting City Manager Present Sonia Carvalho City Attorney Present Jason Baltimore Assistant City Attorney Present Genoveva Rocha City Clerk Present Telicia Lopez Chief Deputy City Clerk Present CLOSED SESSION REPORT Assistant City Attorney Jason Baltimore stated there was reportable action from Closed Session. On item A(ii), the City approved a payment of $800,000 with a vote of 5 to 1. Councilmembers Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, and Alexander voted yes. Council Member Ibarra voted no. Council Member Calvin was not present for the discussion. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Pastor Lee Coe of Calvary Chapel led the invocation, and Councilmember Kimberly Calvin led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. CITY MANAGER UPDATE Jeff Kraus, Public Information Officer, provided updates on the Homeless Injunction, Navigation Center, Animal Shelter Modular Structure request and the Grant from San Manuel for Animal Services, and the Little Mountain Fire. Special events included the unveiling of a mural at the Encanto Community Center, instillation of solar streetlights, and the Little League Baseball Regionals in San Bernardino.,        Packet Page. 131 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 4 PUBLIC HEARING 1. Proposed Fourth Substantial Amendment to Fiscal Years 2020­2021 Annual Action Plan Associated with Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus Relief Funds (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Conduct a public hearing to obtain citizens’ comments on the proposed Fourth Substantial Amendments to the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan for the Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus Relief Funds; and 2. Approve the Substantial Amendment to Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan for the Community Development Block Grant; and 3. Approve the Technical Correction and Adopt Resolution number 2024-180; and authorize the Director of Finance to amend the Fiscal Year 2024/25 Operating Budget with an appropriation of $316,992.70 to both revenues and expenditures in accordance with the Fourth Substantial Amendment to the 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan; and 4. Authorize the City Manager or designee to take any further actions and execute any further agreements or documents as necessary to effectuate the submittal of the Proposed Substantial Amendments to Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan. Mayor Tran opened the public hearing at 5:14 PM. Housing Manager, Trina Perez, provided a presentation City Clerk Rocha reported there were no requests to speak. The public hearing was closed at 5:19 PM. Councilmember Figueroa gave a statement to praise staff for correcting an issue that arose with HUD. Where they believed there was overspending however funding had been reallocated to Lytle Creek Park. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­180 [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: Sandra Ibarra ABSENT: Ben Reynoso PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS LISTED ON THE AGENDA Rikke Van Johnson spoke on a meeting he had with Mayor Tran where his role on the waterboard was discussed.        Packet Page. 132 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 5 Will Greer, resident and director with the San Bernardino Unified School district, expressed gratitude toward the City Council. He voiced concerns about the city's conditions and requested the plans for revitalization and beautification of the city. Treasure Ortiz requested the construction of new kennels to save animal lives, criticized the use of tax money for Carrigan settlement, and raised concerns with code enforcement. Al Palazzo spoke on his ideas for city improvements, including affordable housing and social justice. Less spoke about new construction near the freeway and the need for homeless housing and a resource center. L’Rea Robinson criticized the lack of clean up for homeless encampments, code enforcement's lack of follow-through on violations and personal issues with code enforcement and her landlord. John Shollenberger promoted attendance to a candidate forum at Arrowhead Country Club and expressed his support of 7th Ward Candidate Treasure Ortiz. Bertha Parra thanked the council and police chief for their work and spoke on issues with loud music and illegal fireworks in her neighborhood. She requested more Fourth of July banners to prevent violations. Christian Shaughnessy discussed the Lutheran Social Services project progress and the need for accountability. He spoke in support of Item 20. Mike Hartley criticized the settlements with the Carrigan and Valdivia cases. He urged the council to stop spending. He addressed code enforcement issues and spoke about businesses and the need for police assistance with abandoned vehicles. Darleese Brown spoke about a negative experience at the Animal shelter and issues she had attempting to adopt a dog due to aggression concerns. She spoke on adopting this pet from a rescue organization. Lydia Zavala expressed displeasure with the spay and neuter program, funding and the high number of animal deaths at the shelter. Xavina Walbert spoke in support of Item No. 20. Ruben Mendoza spoke in favor of Item No. 20, invited the MCC and staff to discuss housing and homelessness. Sharon Negrete raised concerns about animal shelter conditions, the handling of additional dogs through a service contract and questioned the performance of Director Kris Watson and Deputy Director Jasmin Glover. Rev. Milena Albert spoke as an animal rights activist and urged the council to review and strategically allocate funds for animal shelter improvements to reduce animal deaths. Jennifer Romo spoke on her experiences with the shelter, including taking in strays and problems with shelter conditions and animal care.        Packet Page. 133 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 6 Melissa Moreno highlighted issues at the animal shelter, including overheating and stress-related euthanasia of dogs, and called for changes to address these problems. Georgia L. criticized the lack of kennels, questioned the use of funding, and suggested potential solutions for animal services issues. Pamala Hall expressed concern with computer access for residents at the library, questioned grant spending, and highlighted issues with the spay and neuter program. Scott Olson commented on his observations of the city, animal treatment, and his candidacy for state assembly. Criticized recall attempts and stressed the need for experienced candidates on the City Council. Tim Usher requested approval of Item 18 related to drainage issues on Hill Drive, describing the resulting damage to infrastructure. Albert Robles, attorney, spoke on the lawsuit against his client Council Member Calvin and addressed the Carrigan case. Zazette Scott advocated for better homeless housing options and criticized the city's insufficient housing solutions. Junior Carillo spoke in favor of the meeting time change, issues with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and homelessness, and thanked the Fire Department and Police Department for their work. At this time, City Clerk Rocha announced that written correspondence had also been received and was added to the online agenda backup from the following: Inland SoCal Housing Collective, Inland Equity Community Land Trust, Khrystyne Villalobos, and Tony Lara. City Clerk Rocha read the names of those individuals who submitted written public comments prior to the meeting: CONSENT CALENDAR Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and are voted on in a single motion unless a council or staff member has pulled the item for more discussion. RESULT: APPROVED THE CONSENT CALENDAR [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander Councilmember Alexander left the dais at 7:04 p.m. and returned at 7:07 p.m., however he was not present for the vote on the Consent Calendar. Council Member Ibarra pulled Item No. 2 for questions, Council Member Figueroa had a comment for Item No. 11, and Council Member Calvin had a comment for item No. 17.        Packet Page. 134 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 7 Council Member Figueroa wanted the Parks and Recreation Director to speak briefly on item No.11 to provide information to the public. City Attorney Carvalho explained that the vote on the consent calendar had concluded, and further discussion is out of order under Parliamentary Procedure. Council Member Sanchez commented that the Council should pull items when they have questions or want to make comments on consent calendar items. City attorney Carvalho concurred with Council Member Sanchez. 2. Regional Partnership Purchase of Modular Kennel Buildings for Animal Services (All Wards) Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2024-170 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Goods Purchase Agreement with Horizon Structures in the amount of $2,096,324.00 for the purchase of modular kennel buildings for animal services, and 2. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to issue a purchase order to Horizon Structures, in an amount not to exceed $2,096,324.00 RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­170 [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 3. Regional Partnership Modular Office Building Purchase for Animal Services (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution No. 2024-151: 1. Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Goods Purchase Agreement with William Scotsman, Inc. in the amount of $406,492.00 for the purchase of a modular building for Animal Services, and 2. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to issue a purchase order to William Scotsman, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $406,492.00. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­151 [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander        Packet Page. 135 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 8 4. Investment Portfolio Report for May 2024 (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, accept and file the Monthly Investment Portfolio Report for May 2024. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 5. Approval of Commercial and Payroll Disbursements (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California approve the commercial and payroll disbursements for June 2024. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 6. Resolution to Approve the City Investment Policy for FY 2024/25 (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-172, approving the current investment policy for FY 2024/25. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­172 [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 7. Review of Administrative Budget Transfers (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, review and file all listed administrative budget transfers from Jan 1, 2024 through March 31, 2024. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander        Packet Page. 136 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 9 8. Pre­Approval of Mayor and City Council Travel for FY 2024/25 (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, pre-approve travel for elected officials for FY 2024/25 as outlined. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 9. Resolution appointing an Interim Assistant City Manager (U) and Approving Employment Agreement (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-171: 1. Appointing Frederick M. Lewis as Assistant City Manager (U) on an interim basis; and 2. Approving the Employment Agreement. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­171 [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 10. Authorize the issuance of purchase orders for the ongoing maintenance and support services for annual software and hardware usage fees with Atel Communications, Solutions Simplified for DocuSign Software Services, Tyler Technologies, Harris Computers, NPA Computers, Verizon, Frontier and 5­year subscription with Neogov (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Atel Communications; and 2. Authorize the Interim Director of Finance to execute the ongoing purchase orders for Annual Usage Fees, Software Maintenance, and Hardware Maintenance with Atel Communications, Solutions Simplified for DocuSign, Tyler Technologies, Harris Computers, NPA Computers, NeoGov 5-year subscription, Verizon and Frontier. The combined total should not exceed $1,785,621.47 for fiscal year 2024/25.        Packet Page. 137 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 10 RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 11. 2024­2025 Senior Companion Program (SCP) – 1st Year of a 3­Year Grant Award; All Wards Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution No. 2024-173: 1. Ratifying the submission of the application for year one of a three-year grant through the Corporation for National and Community Service’s Senior Companion Program; and 2. Authorizing the City Manager to accept the grant award in the amount of $335,162;and 3. Authorizing the City Manager or their designee to conduct all negotiations, signing and submittals of necessary documents to receive grant awards; and 4. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to appropriate the grant funds for the period of July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025; $355,162 in revenue and expenses and $120,633 in General Fund grant match requirements, for a total of $455,795. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­173 [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 12. Execute Amendment No. 1 to the Redwood Private Security PSA (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, authorize the following: 1. The City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to the professional services agreement with Redwood Private Security, LP, expanding the scope of services and increasing the not to exceed compensation by $515,188, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $2,427,264 annually, and subsequent amendments. 2. The City Manager to adopt subsequent amendments within spending authority that expand the scope of services for future City needs.        Packet Page. 138 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 11 RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 13. Executive Order 14074 Notification to Civilian Governing Body (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, review and approve the proposed “Notification to Civilian Governing Body and Local Community” letter, as required by Presidential Executive Order 14074 governing the potential acquisition of controlled federal government property. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 14. Acceptance of Fiscal Year 2023 Emergency Management Performance Grant (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-174, authorizing: 1. The acceptance of the Fiscal Year 2023 Emergency Management Performance Grant; and 2. The amendment of the Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Adopted Budget in both revenue and expenditures by $28,864. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­179 [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 15. Amendment No. 1 to the Vendor Services Agreement with West Coast Lights and Sirens Inc. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to the vendor services agreement with West Coast Lights and Sirens Inc., expanding the scope of services and extending the term of the agreement.        Packet Page. 139 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 12 RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 16. Award of Agreement for Construction of Speicher Park Ballfields Improvements Project with Bilbro Construction Company, Inc., and approval of Task Order Number 001 for Construction Management and Inspection Services (Ward 2) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution 2024-175: 1. Approving the award of an Agreement with Bilbro Construction Company, Inc. in the amount of $2,915,258.44 for the Construction of the Speicher Park Ballfields Improvements (Project); and 2. Approving Task Order Number 001 with TKE Engineering, Inc., in the amount of$415,019 for construction management and inspection services for the project; and 3. Authorizing the project construction contingencies, professional services contingencies, and administrative costs in the amount of $744,981 for construction of the Project; and 4. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2024/25 CIP Budget by $2,574,670.02 using the Cultural Development fund balance to bring the current project budget to $4,075,258.44. 5. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute all documents with Bilbro Construction Company Inc., and TKE Engineering Inc. necessary to carry out the Project; and 6. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to expend the contingency fund, if necessary, to complete the Project. 7. Finding the Project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines § 15302 (“Replacement or Reconstruction”). RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­175 [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander        Packet Page. 140 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 13 17. Award of On­Call General Services Agreement and Approval of Task Order Number 001 for design of Drainage Improvements at 19th Street near Massachusetts Avenue (Ward 6) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution 2024-176: 1. Approving Task Order Number 001 with Consultants Hernandez, Kroone & Associates, Inc. in the amount of $64,930 for design of 19th Street near Massachusetts Avenue Drainage Improvements. (Project); and 2. Authorizing the project design contingencies, project management, and administrative costs in the total amount of $11,000 for design of the Project; and 3. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2024/25 Capital Improvement Plan by re-allocating $75,930 from the Storm Drain Upgrade project to the 19th Street Drainage Improvements near Massachusetts Ave project; and 4. Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute all documents necessary for the Task Order with Hernandez, Kroone & Associates, Inc.; and 5. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to expend the contingency fund, if necessary, to complete the project RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­176 [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 18. Approval of On­Call Professional Services Agreement and approval of Task Order Number 001 for Drainage Improvements at W Hill Drive near N Acacia Avenue (Ward 4) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution 2024-177: 1. Approving Task Order Number 001 with Rick Engineering Company, Inc,. in the amount of $108,980.00 for design of W Hill Drive near Acacia Drainage Improvements (Project); and 2. Authorizing design contingencies, project management, and administrative costs in the amount of $17,000; and 3. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2024/25 Capital Improvement Plan by re-allocating $125,980 from the Storm Drain Upgrade project to the W Hill Drive near N Acacia Drainage Improvements project; and 4. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute an all documents necessary for the Task Order with Rick Engineering Company; and 5.Authorizing the City Manager or designee to expend the contingency        Packet Page. 141 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 14 fund, if necessary, to complete the project. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­177 [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander 19. Award of Professional Services Agreement for Consulting Services for the Administration of Special Districts, Assessment Districts, and Community Facility Districts (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-179: 1. Approving the award of a Professional Services Agreement with Spicer Consulting Group, LLC, for a three-year term through July 31, 2027, with two (2) twelve (12) month extension options, with the total Agreement amount not to exceed $1,203,370, and authorize the City Manager to execute all documents to effectuate the Agreement; and 2. Authorize the Director of Finance & Management Services to issue a purchase order in the amount of $1,203,370. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­179 [6­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin ABSENT: Damon Alexander        Packet Page. 142 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 15 DISCUSSION 20. HOME Investment Partnership Program Infill Housing Master Development Agreement with Neighborhood Partnership Housing Services Community Redevelopment, Inc. (Wards 2) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Adopt Resolution 2024-178, authorizing the execution of the HOME Investment Partnership Program Infill Housing Development Master Agreement between the City of San Bernardino and Neighborhood Partnership Housing Services Community Redevelopment, Inc.; and 2. Approve the HOME Investment Partnership Program Infill Housing Development Master Agreement between the City of San Bernardino and Neighborhood Partnership Housing Services, Inc., which: a. Is in the amount of $744,000. b. Authorizes the transfer of ownership of 3 blighted parcels from the City of San Bernadino to NPHS Community Redevelopment, Inc. 3. Authorize the Director of Finance & Management Services to amend the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Operating Budget by $744,000 using HOME Investment Partnership fund balance; and 4. Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to take further actions and execute any further documents as necessary to effectuate the agreements. Council Member Ibarra made a motion to approve which was seconded by Council Member Alexander. Mayor and City Council waived the presentation from staff, and no staff report was given. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­178 [7­0] MOVER: Sandra Ibarra, Council Member, Ward 2 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander 21. Small Business Grant Program, Round Two: Proposed Award Amount Increase (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California amend the Small Business Grant Program, Round Two, increasing the award amounts from $5,000 & $10,000 to $10,000 & $20,000. Council Member Sanchez requested to move forward without the staff presentation on this item. He explained that the presentation was previously done, and this item is just changing the award amounts. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, Alexander        Packet Page. 143 Regular Meeting DRAFT MINUTES August 07, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 16 MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL UPDATES/REPORTS ON CONFERENCES & MEETINGS At this time, the Mayor and City Council provided city-wide updates. Highlights included thanking the Police Department and Fire Department for their response to the Little Mountain Fire and thoughts and prayers to those affected. The city received assistance from Assembly Member James Ramos. An event was held by Community Action Partnership, acknowledged San Bernardino Unified Schol District educators, and Girls Softball Western Regionals. ADJOURNMENT The meeting of the Mayor and City Council was adjourned on Wednesday, August 7, 2024, at 7:29 pm, In honor of John Harris, father of Council Member Damon Alexander. The next joint regular meeting of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency will be held on Wednesday, August 21, 2024, in the Council Chamber located at 555 West 6th Street, San Bernardino, California 92410. Closed Session will begin at 4:00 p.m. and Open Session will begin at 5:00 p.m. By:_________________________ Genoveva Rocha, CMC        Packet Page. 144 City of San Bernardino 201 North E Street San Bernardino, CA 92401 http://www.sbcity.org Draft Minutes REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR HOUSING AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ACTING AS THE SAN BERNARDINO JOINT POWERS FINANCING AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 21, 2024 4:00 PM Closed Session was called to order at 4:00 PM by Mayor Pro Tem Fred Shorett on Wednesday, August 21, 2024, at Feldheym Central Library, San Bernardino, CA. CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Present Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Present Juan Figueroa Council Member, Ward 3 Present Fred Shorett Mayor Pro-Tem, Ward 4 Present Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Absent Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Absent Damon L. Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Present Helen Tran Mayor Absent Rochelle Clayton Acting City Manager Present Thomas Rice Assistant City Attorney Present Telicia Lopez Chief Deputy City Clerk Present Perla Lopez Deputy City Clerk Present Mayor Helen Tran Council Members Theodore Sanchez Sandra Ibarra Juan Figueroa Fred Shorett Ben Reynoso Kimberly Calvin Damon L. Alexander        Packet Page. 145 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes August 21, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 2 4:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENT At this time public comments for Closed Session were heard. Georgia L. spoke in support of the Acting City Manager Rochelle Clayton. Lydia Savala spoke in support of the Acting City Manager Rochelle Clayton. The Mayor and City Council convened into Closed Session at 4:03 PM. CLOSED SESSION A) Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957) Acting City Manager (Acting City Manager Initiated Goal Setting Process) 5:00 P.M. The Regular Meeting was called to order at 5:02 PM by Mayor Pro Tem Fred Shorett on Wednesday, August 21, 2024, at Feldheym Central Library, San Bernardino, CA. CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Present Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Present Juan Figueroa Council Member, Ward 3 Present Fred Shorett Mayor Pro-Tem, Ward 4 Present Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Absent Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Absent Damon L. Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Present Helen Tran Mayor Absent Rochelle Clayton Acting City Manager Present Thomas Rice Assistant City Attorney Present Telicia Lopez Chief Deputy City Clerk Present Perla Lopez Deputy City Clerk Present CLOSED SESSION REPORT Assistant City Attorney Thomas Rice stated that there was no reportable action from Closed Session. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Pastor Andrew Bates from Generations Church led the invocation, and Council Member Alexander led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.        Packet Page. 146 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes August 21, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 3 PRESENTATIONS 1. Proclamation for International Overdose Awareness Day in the City of San Bernardino – August 31, 2024 (All Wards) Mayor Pro Tem Shorett presented the proclamation to Mr. James Dettman and Mrs. Jessica Garcia of Veterans Alcoholic Rehabilitation Program Inc. (VARP) PUBLIC HEARING 2. Appeal 24­02 of Appeal 24­01 for Development Permit Type­D 21­18, 19, 20, and 21 (Ward 3) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution No. 2024-145 denying Appeal 24-02, thereby upholding the Planning Commission’s denial of Appeal 24-01 for Development Permit Type-D 21-18, 19, 20, and 21, which upholds the Development and Environmental Review Committee’s (DERC) adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration in conjunction with the approval of Development Permit Type-D 21-18, 19, 20, and 21, allowing the development and establishment of five (5) service commercial buildings totaling approximately 67,451 square feet on several APNs for a combined 4.81 acres within the Commercial Regional (CR-3) zone. Mayor Pro Tem Shorett opened the public hearing at 5:14 PM. There were no requests to speak. The public hearing was continued to September 18, 2024. RESULT: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING TO SEPTEMBER 18, 2024 [5­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Juan Figueroa, Council Member, Ward 3 AYES: Sanchez, Figueroa, Ibarra, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin        Packet Page. 147 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes August 21, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 4 3. Appeal 24­03 for Development Permit Type­P 22­05 (Ward 3) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-181 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, denying Appeal 24-03 thereby upholding Planning Commission’s denial of Development Permit Type–P 22-05 to allow the development, establishment, and operation of a truck and trailer parking facility on a parcel containing approximately 2.90 acres, located on the Southeast corner of W. Rialto Avenue and S. Rancho Avenue (APN: 0142212-22) within the Industrial Light (IL) zone (Attachment 1). OR 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-182 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, granting Appeal 24-03 of the Planning Commission’s denial, thereby approving Development Permit Type–P 22-05 to allow the development, establishment, and operation of a truck and trailer parking facility on a parcel containing approximately 2.90 acres, located on the Southeast corner of W. Rialto Avenue and S. Rancho Avenue (APN: 0142‑212-22) within the Industrial Light (IL) zone; and finding the project subject to a Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (Attachment 6). Mayor Pro Tem Shorett opened the public hearing at 5:16 PM. Chief Deputy City Clerk Telicia Lopez administered the Oath to anyone who desired to speak. Chantel Choice, Associate Planner provided a presentation. Firm representatives for Olivos Otay, LLC., Sara Atsbaha, and Ricardo Posa provided a presentation. There were questions and concerns from the City Council to the representatives regarding the signatures collected, whether the parking facility would support electric trucks? The business hours, and the lighting in the facility going into the neighborhood. Sara Atsbaha and Ricardo Posa addressed the City Council and stated. the proposed project did not have electric vehicle charging, but it could be added in the future. The proposed business hours would be 7 AM to 7 PM. Lighting is away from residential properties to avoid light pollution. At this time public comments were heard for this public hearing. There were twenty-four requests to speak, but only twenty spoke. Luis Ojeda supported the operation of a truck and trailer parking facility. He also mentioned that the area is active with trucks because of the surrounding businesses. Luz Hernandez spoke in support of the parking facility; truck drivers need a safe place to park. Maria Cervantez spoke in support of the parking facility; her husband is a truck driver, and having the facility will allow him to park his truck in the same city they live in.        Packet Page. 148 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes August 21, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 5 Erik Prieto spoke in support of the parking facility. The following individuals spoke against the parking facility and expressed concerns about their family safety, health, and property value. Leonela Lopez Georgia L Treasure Ortiz Christian Flores Dolores Armstead Miriam Nieto Ma Carmen Gonzalez David Tyree Sandra Salazar Lissette Fierros Jose Sanchez Ana Diaz David Alvarado Teresa Balcazar Benjamin Haro Ricky Paque At this time, Sara Atsbaha and Ricardo Posa addressed the concerns regarding traffic, the facility's proximity to a residential area, nearby schools, hours of operation, and street improvement. The public hearing was closed at 6:58 PM. Council Member Sanchez made a motion to amend the conditions of approval to require that the roadway improvements be maintained into perpetuity as long as the development permits are in place. Council Member Figueroa seconded the amended motion. Council Member Alexander requested to add infrastructure for future electrical trucks and include four charging stalls. Council Member Sanchez, was amenable to adding the request to his motion. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­182 WITH AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO REQUIRE THAT THE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS BE MAINTAINED INTO PERPETUITY AS LONG AS THE DEVELOPMENT PERMITS ARE IN PLACE AND ALSO ADDED INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE FUTURE OF ELECTRICAL TRUCKS, TO INCLUDE FOUR CHARGING STALLS. [4­1] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Juan Figueroa, Council Member, Ward 3 AYES: Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: Sandra Ibarra ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin        Packet Page. 149 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes August 21, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 6 4. Specific Plan Amendment 23­02 and Conditional Use Permit Revision 23­11 (Ward 6) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-183 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, considering an Environmental Impact Report, making Responsible Agency Findings, and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and an Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report (Attachment 1); and 2. Introduce, read by title only, and waive further reading of Ordinance No. MC-1641 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approving Specific Plan Amendment 23-02 amending the CalMat/Cajon Creek Specific Plan Design Guidelines governing mining depths and areas within the City of San Bernardino Areas K, L, M, and N (Attachment 6); and 3. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-184 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approving Conditional Use Permit Revision 23-11 amending Conditional Use Permit 91-31/Reclamation Plan allowing the consolidation of the City’s Reclamation Plan with an updated Amended Reclamation Plan to allow for the continuation of an aggregate mining operation within the San Bernardino County Area Q and City of San Bernardino Areas K, L, M, and N on a project site containing approximately 530.5 acres located southwest of Cajon Boulevard between Institution Road to the north and Devils Creek Diversion Channel to the south within Specific Plan – CalMat/Cajon Creek Industrial Extractive and Industrial Light zone designations (Attachment 8); and 4. Schedule the adoption of the Ordinance for the regularly scheduled meeting of the Mayor and City Council on September 4, 2024. Mayor Pro Tem Shorett opened the public hearing at 7:04 PM. There were two requests to speak. Georgia L. spoke how the Mayor and City Council needing to listen to their constituents. Pedro Morales spoke on the struggle to find an insurance company to insure his property, and the constant property damage caused by the proximity to the mine. He asked for assistance in secure a better insurer for his property. Mayor Pro Tem Shorett closed the public hearing at 7:10 PM. Chief Deputy City Clerk Telicia Lopez read the title for Ordinance No. MC-1641into the record. RESULT: INTRODUCED FIRST READING ORDINANCE NO. MC­1641, ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­183, AND RESOLUTION NO. 2024­184 [5­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Juan Figueroa, Council Member, Ward 3 AYES: Sanchez, Figueroa, Ibarra, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin        Packet Page. 150 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes August 21, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 7 CITY MANAGER UPDATE Jeff Kraus, Public Information Officer, provided city wide updates. Highlights included Homeless Injunction Update, the San Bernardino Animal Shelter update, Business Façade Improvement Grant – Paintbrush Program, the Zero Emissions Multiple Unite (ZEMU) testing on the Arrow Line between San Bernardino and Redlands, the two new Downtown Murals; the “Breezeway” created by Arturo Orellana and the “Dream” by Adam Aguilar and welcoming Luis Marquez as the City as Legislative and Governmental Affairs Manager. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS LISTED AND NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Judi Penman spoke about the Route 66 Rendezvous event, to be held on October 5th. Al Palazzo spoke about the seminars he will host beginning on September 7, 2024. The first seminar will be held at the Feldheym Central Library. To discuss his vision for San Bernardino. Jose Mendoza, Disabled American Veterans, Chapter 12, spoke about the expansion of the food bank distribution and the renovation of their facility. Georgia L. spoke about the Animal Shelter and expressed that the services offered do not help the community. Lydia Savala spoke about how the donations from the San Manuel Band of Indians to the Animal Shelter should be used for the community. Dolores Armstead spoke about how the actions taken by the Mayor and City Council affect the community. Sarahi Razo spoke about the homeless in the city and how the community feels unsafe. She also asked for a permanent location for vendors. Page Miller thanked the Police Department, Fire Department, and Code Enforcement for their work; she also, spoke on the upcoming election and propositions. Luis Ojeda spoke about the vehicles being towed by Code Enforcement without warning. Pamala Hall expressed concerns about the status of the animal shelters. Mercedes Trujillo spoke on the number of dogs in San Bernardino. She also expressed the animal shelter does not help city residents with their pets. Selina spoke about the animal shelter partnership with surrounding cities being approved by the mayor and city council before presenting the partnership to the Animal Control Commission. Sharon Negrete spoke about the animal shelter being overcrowded.        Packet Page. 151 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes August 21, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 8 Scott Olson spoke on several topics: the recall of Council Member Shorett, being an assembly member candidate for San Bernardino; he commented that having outsourced the San Bernardino Fire Department increased costs to the residents and his support for Ward 7 candidate Jim Penman. Robert Porter spoke about the several grants the Arts and Historical Preservation Commission had received and how the grants funded the murals throughout the city. He also mentioned the need for commissioners for the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Commission. The commission was unable to meet due to a lack of quorum. At this time, Chief Deputy City Clerk Telicia Lopez announced that written correspondence had also been received from: Jane Harris, Jerry Pugh, Clive Shaver, Jaclyn Silvestri, Christian Flores, Constantino Gabrie, Alejandra Guzman, Esther Ramos, Rico Sanchez, and JerrellAnn Smith. The written correspondence was added to the online agenda backup. CONSENT CALENDAR Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and are voted on in a single motion unless a council or staff member has pulled the item for more discussion. RESULT: APPROVED THE CONSENT CALENDAR [5­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin CONSENT CALENDAR 5. Approval of Various Mayor and City Council Meeting Minutes Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approve the meeting minutes for the following dates: 1. April 5, 2023, Special Closed Session Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 2. April 5, 2023, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 3. April 19, 2023, Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 4. August 18, 2023, Special Closed Session Meeting of the Mayor and City Council 5. August 21, 2023, Special Closed Session Meeting of the Mayor and City Council RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [5­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin        Packet Page. 152 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes August 21, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 9 6. Approval of Commercial and Payroll Disbursements (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California approve the commercial and payroll disbursements for July 2024. RESULT: APPROVED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [5­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin 7. Accept Grant Funds from the California Emerging Technology Fund to Advance Digital Equity (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-185: 1. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to accept grant award funds in the amount of $1,000 from the California Emerging Technology Fund to; and 2. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to conduct all negotiations, signing, and submittals of necessary documents to receive the grant award funds; and 3. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2024/25 budget in both revenues and expenses and appropriate $1,000 in grant award funds to be used towards advancing digital equity. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­185 [5­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin        Packet Page. 153 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes August 21, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 10 8. Accept Donation and Budget Amendments (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-186 to: Authorize the Acting City Manager to accept $53,508.17 from the Imperial County Office of Education (ICOE) and $102 donation from the San Bernardino Emblem Club No. 178. Authorize the Interim Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2024/25 General Fund Operating Budget by $53,610.17 in both revenues and expenditures. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­186 [5­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin 9. Amendment No. 3 to Goods Purchase Agreement with Ingram Library Services, LLC. (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Goods Purchase Agreement with Ingram Library Services, LLC, for a one-year option for Fiscal Year 2024/25 and increasing the annual amount by $65,000 for a not-to exceed amount of $150,000 for the purchase of library books and authorize the Interim Director of Finance and Management Services to approve a purchase order for an amount not to exceed $150,000. RESULT: ADOPTED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [5­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin        Packet Page. 154 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes August 21, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 11 10. Five­Year Capital Improvement Plan FY 2024/25 to FY 2028/29 for Measure I Local Expenditures (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution 2024-187 approving the Measure I Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Year 2024/25 through Fiscal Year 2028/29 and Measure I Expenditure Strategy. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­187 [5­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin 11. Agreement with Espinoza Electric, dba Quality Electric and Horizon Lighting for Street Light Maintenance and Related Services (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a Maintenance Services Agreement with Espinoza Electric dba: Quality Light & Electrical; and 2. Execute a second Maintenance Services Agreement with Horizon Lighting for street light maintenance and related services; and 3. Authorize the Director of Finance and Management Services to issue a purchase order in the amount of $750,000 to Espinoza Electric dba: Quality Light & Electrical, Inc.; and 4. Authorize the Director of Finance and Management Services to issue a second purchase order in the amount of $750,000 to Horizon Lighting. RESULT: ADOPTED STAFF’S RECOMMENDATION [5­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin        Packet Page. 155 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes August 21, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 12 12. Approve Final Tract Map No. 20421 (Ward 5) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-189, approving Final Tract Map No. 20421 (Subdivision 21-11) involving the subdivision a parcel (APN 0261-151-10) containing 6.10 acres into twenty-five (25) single family lots located at the southwest corner of W. Belmont Avenue and N. Olive Avenue, accepting the public dedications as set forth on said map; and authorizing execution of the standard form of agreement for the subdivision improvements. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­189 [5­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin 13. Approve Stop Sign Installation on 40th Street and Parkside Drive (Ward 4,7) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-188 authorizing the City Manager and/or designee to amend Resolution No. 655 entitled, in part, “A Resolution… designating certain streets or portions thereof as through highways…” and authorizing the establishment of an all-way stop control at the intersection of 40th Street and Parkside Drive. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­188 [5­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Damon Alexander, Council Member, Ward 7 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin        Packet Page. 156 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes August 21, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 13 DISCUSSION 14. Cal Cities General Assembly ­ Appointment of Voting Delegates and Alternates (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approve the selection of one voting delegate and up to two alternate voting delegates to the 2024 Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo on October 16-18, 2024, in Long Beach, California Convention Center. There was no discussion on this item. RESULT: APPOINTED COUNCIL MEMBER CALVIN AS THE VOTING DELEGATE, AND COUNCIL MEMBER REYNOSO AS THE FIRST ALTERNATE VOTING DELEGATE, AND COUNCIL MEMBER SHORETT AS THE SECOND ALTERNATE [5­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ben Reynoso and Kimberly Calvin MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL UPDATES/REPORTS ON CONFERENCES & MEETINGS There were no Mayor and City Council updates/reports on conferences and meetings. ADJOURNMENT The meeting of the Mayor and City Council was adjourned on Wednesday, August 21, 2024, at 8:20 p.m. In honor of John Howard Weeks, Johnnie Ann Ralph, and Reginald Webb. The next joint regular meeting of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency will be held on Wednesday, September 4, 2024, in the Council Chamber located at 555 West 6th Street, San Bernardino, California 92410. Closed Session will begin at 4:00 p.m. and Open Session will begin at 5:00 p.m. By: Telicia Lopez Telicia Lopez, CMC, Chief Deputy City Clerk        Packet Page. 157 City of San Bernardino 201 North E Street San Bernardino, CA 92401 http://www.sbcity.org DRAFT MINUTES For The Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency, Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Acting as the Successor Housing Agency to the Redevelopment Agency, Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Acting as the Housing Authority, and Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Acting as the San Bernardino Joint Powers Financing Authority WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2024 4:00 PM Closed Session was called to order at 4:09 PM by Mayor Helen Tran on Wednesday, September 4, 2024, at Feldheym Central Library, San Bernardino, CA. CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Present Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Present Juan Figueroa Council Member, Ward 3 Present Fred Shorett Mayor Pro-Tem, Ward 4 Present Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Present Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Present Damon L. Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Present Helen Tran Mayor Present Rochelle Clayton Acting City Manager Present Jason Baltimore Assistant City Attorney Present Genoveva Rocha City Clerk Present Courtney Bowen Deputy City Clerk Present Mayor Helen Tran Council Members Theodore Sanchez Sandra Ibarra Juan Figueroa Fred Shorett Ben Reynoso Kimberly Calvin Damon L. Alexander        Packet Page. 158 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes September 4, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 2 4:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENT There were no public comments for Closed Session. CLOSED SESSION A) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS Titles: City Manager; City Attorney; City Clerk (Initiation of Process) B) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT (PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957) Title: Interim City Manager C) CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6) Agency designated representatives: Mayor or other Mayor and Council designee Unrepresented employee: Acting City Manager/Interim City Manager D) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8) Property: 300 North E Street (Parcel Map 688, Parcel 12 Book 25 Page 47 Parcel Map 688 Parcel No. 12 formally known as City PTN Blk 12 and PTN 3rd St VAC) City Negotiator: City Manager or Designee Negotiating Parties: El Corte Ingles Under Negotiations: Price and Terms 5:00 P.M. The Regular Meeting was called to order at 5:09 PM by Mayor Helen Tran on Wednesday, September 4, 2024, at Feldheym Central Library, San Bernardino, CA. CALL TO ORDER Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Theodore Sanchez Council Member, Ward 1 Present Sandra Ibarra Council Member, Ward 2 Present Juan Figueroa Council Member, Ward 3 Present Fred Shorett Mayor Pro-Tem, Ward 4 Present Ben Reynoso Council Member, Ward 5 Present Kimberly Calvin Council Member, Ward 6 Present Damon L. Alexander Council Member, Ward 7 Present Helen Tran Mayor Present Rochelle Clayton Acting City Manager Present Sonia Carvalho City Attorney Present Genoveva Rocha City Clerk Present Courtney Bowen Deputy City Clerk Present        Packet Page. 159 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes September 4, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 3 INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Pastor Paul E. Jones from Independent Trinity Benjamin E. Jones Community Resource Center led the invocation, and Sarai Goumashyan from Cajon High School led the Pledge of Allegiance. CLOSED SESSION REPORT There was no reportable action from Closed Session. However, City Attorney Sonia Carvalho did advise that Closed Session would reconvene after the conclusion of Open Session to discuss items B and C. PRESENTATIONS 1. Proclamation for National Library Card Sign­Up & Literacy Month in the City of San Bernardino – September 2024 (All Wards) The Mayor and City Council presented the proclamation to Nikki Villalobos, Library Program Coordinator. PUBLIC HEARING 2. PUBLIC HEARING ON ANNEXATION NO. 28 TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 2019­1 (WARD 5) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Hold a Public Hearing; and 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-190 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, calling an election to submit to the qualified electors the question of levying the amended special tax within the area proposed to be annexed to Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) (Annexation No. 28, Tax Zone 29); and 3. Hold a special landowner election and canvass the election; and 4. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-191 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, declaring election results for Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) (Annexation No. 28, Tax Zone 29); and 5. Introduce, read by title only, and waive further reading of Ordinance No. MC-1642 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, amending Ordinance No. MC-1522 and levying special taxes to be collected during Fiscal Year 2024-2025 to pay annual costs of the maintenance and servicing of landscaping, lighting, water quality improvements, graffiti, streets, street sweeping, parks and trail maintenance, a reserve fund for capital replacement, and administrative expenses with respect to City of San Bernardino Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services); and 6. Schedule the adoption of Ordinance No. MC-1642 for September 18, 2024. Mayor Tran opened the Public Hearing at 5:17 PM. There were no comments or requests to speak.        Packet Page. 160 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes September 4, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 4 The public hearing was closed at 5:19 PM. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­190 [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­191 [7­0] MOVER: Ben Reynoso, Council Member, Ward 5 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None RESULT: INTRODUCED ORDINANCE NO. MC­1642 [7­0] MOVER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 SECONDER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None CITY MANAGER UPDATE Public Information Officer Jeff Kraus provided updates. Highlights included the recent heatwave, Ribbon Cutting events for new businesses, and a free spay and neuter program offered by Animal Services. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS LISTED AND NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Mauricio Arellano, Superintendent of Schools for San Bernardino Unified School District, thanked the Mayor and City Council and staff for their support of the school district. He asked everyone to promote the District’s vision for 2030 and beyond. Georgia L. spoke about deficiencies at the animal shelter. Mike Hartley expressed his love and hope for San Bernardino. Jose Mendoza, Commander for Disabled American Veterans Chapter 12, thanked staff for going above and beyond for veterans, and thanked the Mayor for attending his organization’s barbecue. Al Palazzo he would be hosting seminars discussing his vision for the City. Sharon Negrete asked the Mayor and City Council to conduct a thorough investigation into the animal shelter and how funds are being spent.        Packet Page. 161 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes September 4, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 5 Lydia Savala stated that funds for the animal shelter have been misused, and the shelter is overcrowded. Luis Ojeda asked about the status of Seccombe Lake park, and stated he could help clean up the park. Pastor Paul E. Jones thanked the Mayor and City Council for what they have allowed the Benjamin E. Jones Community Resource Center to do. He informed that the center offers various services to low income and displaced individuals. Scott Olson spoke about bad politics, recalls, and what the Council Members and Mayor have done for the City. Dolores Armstead discussed the Carrigan lawsuit, an update on the Oxbow project, and asked why the Police Department is not open on Fridays. Desiree Sanchez with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) spoke in support of Item No. 12. She stated that the City needs to do something to help the homeless during the heatwave. She encouraged working on housing solutions. Robert Porter stated that he feels that there is a prevailing negative feel among the local media. Treasure Ortiz spoke about the homeless emergency, the navigation center, and offering additional affordable housing options. John Shollenberger commented about the settlement with Steve Carrigan. He stated that the City must be more fiscally responsible. Dominic Antunez stated that people should be respectful and not swear during their public comments. Tawnya Rhoades-Hensley spoke on behalf of Gwen Dowdy-Rodgers’ family. She stated that the family asked her to thank everyone for their support. She also announced an upcoming backpack giveaway. Bridget Harness spoke about supporting and helping each other and the homeless in the community. Edwin Delgado spoke on behalf of San Bernardino County Supervisor Joe Baca, Jr. He expressed appreciation for opening the navigation center to help vulnerable residents, with the assistance of $3 million contributed by the County. At this time, City Clerk Rocha announced that written correspondence had also been received from Jennifer Bird, Janae Hernandez, and Christine Hart and these written correspondences were added to the online agenda backup.        Packet Page. 162 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes September 4, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 6 CONSENT CALENDAR Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and are voted on in a single motion unless a council or staff member has pulled the item for more discussion. Prior to hearing the Consent Calendar, Acting City Manager Rochelle Clayton stated that Item No. 6 was being pulled and would be brought back at a future meeting. RESULT: APPROVED THE CONSENT CALENDAR, EXCEPT FOR ITEM NO. 6 WHICH WAS PULLED FROM THE AGENDA BY THE CITY MANAGER [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None 3. IRREVOCABLE AGREEMENT TO ANNEX NO. 2024­379 (WARD 6) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution No. 2024-193 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approving the application to the Local Agency Formation Commission to provide City sewer services to a property located at 2210 Ogden Street, San Bernardino, California, within the unincorporated County of San Bernardino territory of Muscoy; and authorizing the City Manager to execute an Irrevocable Agreement to Annex. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­193 [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None 4. IRREVOCABLE AGREEMENT TO ANNEX NO. 2024­380 (WARD 6) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution No. 2024-192 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approving the application to the Local Agency Formation Commission to provide City sewer services to a property located at 2179 Blake Street, San Bernardino, California, within the unincorporated County of San Bernardino territory of Muscoy; and authorizing the City Manager to execute an Irrevocable Agreement to Annex.        Packet Page. 163 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes September 4, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 7 RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­192 [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None 5. SAN BERNARDINO SOCCER COMPLEX LEASE ASSIGNMENT WITH WORLD SPORTS ARENA, LLC (WARD 2) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-194, authorizing the City Manager to execute the Lease Assignment Agreement for the San Bernardino Soccer Complex, located at 2500 Pacific Street, San Bernardino, California; assigning the Lease with San Bernardino Soccer, LLC, to World Sports Arena, LLC. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­194 [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None 6. APPROVE THE PROPOSED BOARD FOR THE “FRIENDS OF SAN BERNARDINO PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACES FOUNDATION” (ALL WARDS) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution 2024-196 approving the proposed list of community members to serve on the board of the recently approved California Non-Profit “Friends of San Bernardino Parks, Recreation and Open Spaces Foundation.” RESULT: NO ACTION TAKEN; THIS ITEM WAS PULLED FROM THE AGENDA BY STAFF 7. ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL OF OLDER CALIFORNIANS NUTRITION PROGRAM GRANT AWARD FY 2024/25 (ALL WARDS) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution No. 2024-195: 1. Authorizing the City Manager to approve a 2024/2025 Budget for year three of a three-year Older Californians Nutrition Program grant through the Department of Aging and Adult Services – Public Guardian (DAAS-PG); and 2. Authorizing the City Manager to accept the 2024/2025 Congregate Meal Program Grant Budget in the amount of $392,541; and 3. Authorizing the City Manager or their designee to conduct all        Packet Page. 164 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes September 4, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 8 negotiations, signing and submittals of necessary documents to receive grant budget awards; 4. Approving certain related purchase orders to Sysco Foods ($215,600) and Hollandia Dairy ($24,530) and Consulting Health and Nutrition Services for continued operation of the Older Californians Nutrition Program; and 5. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the grant funds for the period of July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­195 [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None 8. RECOMMENDATION TO INCREASE THE CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT BUDGET FOR NICHOLSON PARK IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (WARD 6) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution 2024-197: 1. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2024/25 CIP Budget with an additional $745,128 for the Nicholson Park Improvements Project using the Measure S fund balance; and 2. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to increase the construction contingency and construction management budget from $1,290,000 to the total amount of $2,139,564.87; and 3. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to expend the contingency fund, if necessary, to complete the project. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­197 [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None 9. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT TO F.E.C. ELECTRIC INC. (WARD 2, WARD 4) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt Resolution 2024-199: 1. Approving the award of an Agreement with F.E.C. Electric, Inc. for $1,653,396.02 for the Construction of Speicher Park Multipurpose Field        Packet Page. 165 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes September 4, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 9 and Newmark Park Ballfields Improvements (Projects); and 2. Authorizing the project construction contingencies, and administrative costs in the amount of $550,000 for construction of the Project; and 3. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to utilize $2,000,000 from the Ballfield Accessory Upgrades Project as follows: $1,130,254 to Newmark Ballfield Lighting and $869,746 to Speicher Park Multipurpose Field Lighting and 4. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute all documents with F.E.C. Electric, Inc. necessary to carry out the Projects; and 5. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to expend the contingency fund, if necessary, to complete the Projects. 6. Finding the Project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines § 15302 (“Replacement or Reconstruction”). RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­199 [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None 10. APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. 22­1002720 WITH THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (SBCTA) FOR THE STATE ROUTE 210/ WATERMAN AVENUE INTERCHANGE PROJECT (WARD 7) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-198: 1. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the State Route 210/Waterman Avenue Interchange Project budget in the amount of $322,806 from the Measure I Fund, for a total not-to- exceed amount of $1,948,934 and; 2. Authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 2 to Cooperative Agreement No. 22-1002720 with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for Waterman Avenue at State Route 210 (SR-210) interchange Project. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­198 [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None        Packet Page. 166 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes September 4, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 10 DISCUSSION 11. ACCEPT THREE MILLION DOLLARS IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO FOR THE CITY’S NAVIGATION CENTER (ALL WARDS) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-200: 1. Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to accept grant funds in the amount of $3,000,000 from the County of San Bernardino; and 2. Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to execute the Revocable Grant Agreement; and 3. Authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to conduct all additional negotiations, signings, and submittals of necessary documents to receive the grant funds; and 4. Authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2024/25 budget in both revenues and expenditures, and appropriate $3,000,000 in grant funds to be used towards the City’s Navigation Center. Acting City Manager Rochelle Clayton presented the item. Council Member Sanchez stated that the agreement should be amended to include language that guarantees the City’s homeless have priority consideration before individuals from other cities within the County. He said that the way the agreement currently reads, the County has the power to control who is admitted to the navigation center. He made a motion to direct staff to re-confer with the County to affirm this. Council Member Figueroa agreed and seconded the motion. Acting City Manager Clayton stated that although the City has yet to develop a plan as to how to populate the shelter, she would meet with the County again to include priority for the City’s homeless in the grant agreement. Council Member Calvin asked that instead of using the $3 million for the future navigation center, that the City use it for temporary housing right now. She made a motion to plan to utilize the grant funding to provide immediate shelter for the homeless. Acting City Manager Clayton confirmed that the $3 million was strictly dedicated to the navigation center, and that staff were still working on a temporary solution and will be bringing options forward to the Mayor and City Council. She advised that this item was being brought forward at this time because the County requested that the item be approved before the Board of Supervisors Meeting on September 24th. Council Member Shorett asked Council Member Sanchez to amend his motion to bring this item back on September 18th. Council Member Sanchez amended the motion and Council Member Shorett seconded.        Packet Page. 167 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes September 4, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 11 RESULT: DIRECTED STAFF TO BRING THIS ITEM BACK AT THE SEPTEMBER 18, 2024 MEETING, AFTER RE­CONFERING WITH THE COUNTY, WITH REVISIONS TO THE CONTRACT TO EXPLICITLY GUARANTEE ALLOCATION OF THE MAJORITY OF THE NAVIGATION CENTER BEDS TO CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO RESIDENTS [7­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Ibarra, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None 12. REAFFIRMATION OF HOMELESSNESS STATE OF EMERGENCY DECLARATION (ALL WARDS) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-201, reaffirming the declaration of a Homelessness State of Emergency; and 2. Direct the City Manager or designee the ability to take certain administrative actions to streamline the provision of shelter to people experiencing homelessness, including the waiver of purchasing or bidding for physical shelter space. Acting City Manager Clayton presented this item. She stated that the previous Resolution declaring a State of Emergency sunset in February 2024. She advised that reaffirming the State of Emergency would allow the City to move forward after the current injunction is lifted. Council Member Sanchez suggested that the Municipal Code be amended to address the State of Emergency. Acting City Manager Clayton responded that there is a deadline to commit ARPA (American Rescue Plan Act) funds, and this resolution would help accomplish allocating those funds in a more efficient manner. The Municipal Code could be addressed at a later date. RESULT: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2024­201 [6­0] MOVER: Theodore Sanchez, Council Member, Ward 1 SECONDER: Fred Shorett, Council Member, Ward 4 AYES: Sanchez, Figueroa, Shorett, Reynoso, Calvin, and Alexander NOES: None ABSENT: Ibarra        Packet Page. 168 Regular Meeting Draft Minutes September 4, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Page 12 MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL UPDATES/REPORTS ON CONFERENCES & MEETINGS At this time, the Mayor and City Council provided updates. Highlights included street improvement updates, the Library’s Fall Book Sale, and appreciation to staff. At the conclusion of Mayor and Council Updates, the Mayor and City Council convened back to Closed Session to discuss the remaining items. SECOND CLOSED SESSION REPORT There was no reportable action upon the return to Open Session. ADJOURNMENT The meeting of the Mayor and City Council was adjourned on Wednesday, September 4, 2024, at 8:02 PM, in honor of retired police Captain Ronald C. Garcia, and Mrs. Vashtie Margie Dowdy. The next joint regular meeting of the Mayor and City Council and the Mayor and City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency will be held on Wednesday, September 18, 2024, in the Council Chamber located at 555 West 6th Street, San Bernardino, California 92410. Closed Session will begin at 4:00 p.m. and Open Session will begin at 5:00 p.m. By: ______________ Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk        Packet Page. 169 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Rochelle Clayton, Acting City Manager; Kenneth Chapa, Director of Economic Development Department:Economic Development Subject:Resolution Declaring Intent to Annex Territory: Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services): Annexation No. 48, Tax Zone No. 48 (Piedmont Mobile Home Estates) (Ward 4) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-215 of the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, declaring its intention to annex territory into Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino, adopting a map of the area to be proposed (Annexation No. 48) and authorizing the levy of a special taxes therein. Executive Summary The recommended actions are the first step of the annexation process for the proposed development into Community Facilities District (“CFD”) No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services). The property owner has petitioned the City to annex into the City’s CFD to mitigate its impacts for maintenance service of public facilities as a result of the new development. This development will consist of forty-nine (49) mobile home units for senior citizens (55+). The special taxes will be levied annually to offset general fund expenditures related to maintenance of public improvements within and for the benefit of the development. Background On June 5, 2019, the Mayor and City Council approved Resolution No. 2019-81 establishing Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino (the "CFD No. 2019-1" or "District") for the purpose of levying special taxes on parcels of taxable property to provide certain services which are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City.        Packet Page. 170 On July 17, 2019, the Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019-178, establishing CFD No. 2019-1 pursuant to the provisions of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (“Act”). CFD No. 2019-1 allows for the levy of special taxes on parcels of taxable property for the purpose of providing certain services which are necessary to meet increased demands placed by development upon the City. Discussion Development projects are subject to conditions of approval that require projects to form/annex a maintenance district. These districts apply an annual fee or special tax upon properties within the District which provide the revenue to offset the cost of maintenance of the public improvements necessary to serve the development. The Developer has agreed to initiate and conduct the CFD annexation proceedings pursuant to the Act. To that end, the Developer has submitted a "Consent and Waiver" form, which is on file in the City Clerk's office that authorizes the City to (1) hold the election and declare election results; (2) shorten election time requirements; (3) waive analysis and arguments; (4) waive all notice requirements relating to the conduct of the election immediately following the public hearing. The public facilities and services proposed to be financed within the territory to be annexed to the District are the following: 1. Public lighting and appurtenant facilities, including streetlights within public rights-of-way and traffic signals; and 2. Maintenance of streets, including pavement management; and 3. Maintenance of Parks; and 4. Graffiti abatement; and 5. City and County costs associated with the setting, levying and collection of the special tax, and in the administration of the District including the contract administration and for the collection of reserve funds. The proposed development includes approximately 6.79 gross acres of zoned residential property. The property is located at the east side of N. Piedmont Avenue. This development will include a forty-nine (49) unit senior citizen (55+) mobile home park as a new Tax Zone No. 48 within CFD No. 2019-1, as shown in the boundary map and included in the Resolution of Intention as Exhibit “D”. In order to annex into CFD No. 2019-1, a Resolution of Intention to annex property must be approved to identify the facilities to be maintained and establish the maximum special tax for this Tax Zone. The Resolution of Intention shall also set the date and time for the public hearing. The rate and method of apportionment of the special tax for this Tax Zone, (Tax Zone No. 48), is included as Exhibit “C” to the Resolution of Intention. The maximum annual special tax for this development has been calculated to be $247 per unit for FY        Packet Page. 171 2024/25. Special Tax rate is proposed to escalate each year at the greater of Consumer Price Index (CPI) or 2%. Exhibit “H”, attached to the staff report is a maintenance exhibit to illustrate which services are being maintained by the CFD. In order to annex property to CFD No. 2019-1 pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code Section 53311 et seq., the City must adopt a series of three statutorily required Resolutions and an Ordinance which are summarized below. •Resolution declaring City intent to annex territory to Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 including the boundary of the area to be annexed and the rate and method of apportionment of special taxes within the annexation area (the special tax applies only to properties within the annexation area). •Resolution calling an election to submit to the qualified electors the question of levying a special tax within the area proposed to be annexed to the District. •Resolution declaring the results of the election and directing the recording of the notice of special tax lien. •Amend the Ordinance and order the levy and collection of special taxes in the District. The individual property owners in the CFD will be responsible for annual payments of special taxes. Upon full completion of the development, it is estimated that there will be an annual collection of special tax revenues of approximately $12,086 to be used to pay for maintenance costs. On March 1 of each year, every taxable unit for which a building permit has been issued within the boundaries of the CFD will be subject to the special tax for the ensuing Fiscal Year. If the anticipated costs of maintaining the facilities in any given Fiscal Year, prior to buildout of the project, exceeds the special tax revenues available from parcels for which building permits have been issued, then the special tax may also be applied to property within recorded final subdivision maps, as well as other undeveloped property within the boundaries of the CFD. With the adoption of the Resolution of Intention, the Public Hearing would be scheduled for December 18, 2024. 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals This project is consistent with Key Target No 1. Improved Operational & Financial Capacity and Key Target No 4. Economic Growth & Development. This project will contribute to ensure that the City is clean and attractive and provide infrastructure designed for long term economic growth. Fiscal Impact There is no fiscal impact to the City. All costs associated with annexation into the CFD have been borne by the Developer.        Packet Page. 172 Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-215 of the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, declaring its intention to annex territory into Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino, adopting a map of the area to be proposed (Annexation No. 48) and authorizing the levy of a special taxes therein. Attachments Attachment 1 – Resolution of Intention No. 2024-215 Attachment 2 – Exhibit A - Description of Territory Attachment 3 – Exhibit B - Description of Services Attachment 4 – Exhibit C - Rate and Method of Apportionment Attachment 5 – Exhibit D - Boundary Maps Attachment 6 – Exhibit E - Signed Petition Attachment 7 – Exhibit F - Notice of Public Hearing Attachment 8 – Exhibit G - Special Election Ballot Attachment 9 – Exhibit H - Maintenance Exhibit Attachment 10 – Project Map Ward: Fourth Ward Synopsis of Previous Council Actions: June 5, 2019 Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019-81, a Resolution of Intention to form Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Servic-es) of the City of San Bernardino (the “Resolution of Intention”), pursuant to the provisions of the “Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982”. July 17, 2019 Resolution No. 2019-178 was adopted establishing Community Facilities District No. 2019-1; Resolution No. 2019-179 was adopted declaring election results for Community Facilities District No. 2019-1; and first reading of Ordinance No. MC-1522 levying special taxes to be collected during FY 2019-20 to pay annual costs of maintenance, services and expenses with respect to Community Facilities District No. 2019-1. August 7, 2019 Final reading of Ordinance No. MC-1522 levying special taxes to be collected during FY 2019-20 to pay annual costs of maintenance, services and expenses with respect to Community Facilities District No. 2019-1.        Packet Page. 173 Resolution No. 2024-215 Resolution No. 2024-215 November 6, 2024 Page 1 of 4 5 5 8 0 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-215 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ANNEX TERRITORY INTO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, ADOPTING A MAP OF THE AREA TO BE PROPOSED (ANNEXATION NO. 48) AND AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAXES THEREIN WHEREAS, pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”), on June 5, 2019, the Mayor and City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of San Bernardino (the “City”) approved Resolution No. 2019-081 establishing Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California, defined the "CFD No. 2019-1", for the purpose of levying special taxes on parcels of taxable property therein for the purpose of providing certain services which are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council has received a written instrument from the landowner in the CFD No. 2019-1 to initiate and conduct proceedings pursuant to the Act, to annex territory to CFD No. 2019-1 and consenting to the shortening of election time requirements, waiving analysis and arguments, and waiving all notice and word limit requirements for the ballot relating to the conduct of the election; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council has been advised that certain property owners have requested that the area shown in Exhibit D be annexed territory to the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1, that a rate and method of apportionment of the special tax to be levied therein be established. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Intent to Annex. The Mayor and City Council hereby declares that it proposes and intends to conduct proceedings pursuant to Article 3.5 for the annexation to the Community Facilities District of the territory described in Exhibit A attached hereto. The Mayor and City Council determines that the public convenience and necessity require that such territory be annexed to the Community Facilities District. SECTION 2.Name of the Community Facilities District. The name of the existing community facilities district is known as “Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services)”. SECTION 3.Description of Territory Proposed to be Annexed, Annexation Map. The territory proposed to be annexed are included within the boundaries within which property may        Packet Page. 174 Resolution No. 2024-215 Resolution No. 2024-215 November 6, 2024 Page 2 of 4 5 5 8 0 annex to CFD No. 2019-1 and are more particularly described and shown on that certain map entitled “Boundaries – Potential Annexation Area Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California,” as recorded on June 6, 2019 in Book 88 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities District, Page 33, and as Instrument No. 2019-0185395 in the official records of the County of San Bernardino. The territory proposed to be annexed to the CFD No. 2019-1 is described in Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. Such territory is also shown and described on the map thereof entitled "Annexation Map No. 48, Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services), City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California," which is on file with the City Clerk (the "Annexation Map") and attached hereto as Exhibit D. SECTION 4.Description of Authorized Services. The services proposed to be financed by CFD No. 2019-1 (the “Services”) are described in Exhibit B attached hereto. The cost of providing the Services includes “incidental expenses,” which include costs associated of CFD No. 2019-1, determination of the amount of special taxes, collection or payment of special taxes, or costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of CFD No. 2019-1. The Services authorized to be financed by CFD No. 2019-1 are in addition to those currently provided in the territory of CFD No. 2019-1 and do not supplant services already available within that territory. SECTION 5. Levy of Special Taxes. Except where funds are otherwise available, a special tax sufficient to pay the costs of the Services (including incidental expenses), secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all nonexempt real property in CFD No. 2019-1, will be levied annually within CFD No. 2019-1. The Rate and Method of Apportionment, and manner of collection of the special tax are specified in Exhibit C. SECTION 6. Adoption of Annexation Map. Pursuant to Section 3110.5 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Mayor and City Council adopts the Annexation Map as the map of the area proposed to be annexed to the CFD No. 2019-1. Pursuant to Section 3111 of said Code, the City Clerk shall file the original of the Annexation map in his office and shall file a copy of the Annexation Map with the County Recorder of the County of San Bernardino no later than 15 days prior to the date of the hearing specified in Section 7 hereof. SECTION 7. Public Hearing. The Mayor and City Council hereby fixes 5:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as practicable, on Wednesday, December 18, 2024, at the Bing Wong Auditorium of the Norman F. Feldheym Public Library at 555 W. 6th Street, San Bernardino, California, 92410, as the time and place when and where the Mayor and City Council will conduct a public hearing on the proposed annexation of the said territory to the CFD No. 2019-1. SECTION 8. Notice of Public Hearing. The City Clerk is hereby directed to publish, or cause to be published, a notice of said public hearing, in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit F, one time in a newspaper of general circulation published in the area of CFD No. 2019- 1. The publication of said notice shall be completed at least seven days prior to the date herein        Packet Page. 175 Resolution No. 2024-215 Resolution No. 2024-215 November 6, 2024 Page 3 of 4 5 5 8 0 fixed for said hearing. Said notice shall contain the information prescribed by Section 53322 of the Act. SECTION 9. Mailing Ballots. In anticipation of its action on Wednesday December 18, 2024 to call the election on the annexation for the same date, pursuant to waiver of election time limits from the landowners, the Mayor and City Council hereby authorizes the City Clerk to mail to each landowner in the territory proposed to be annexed to the CFD No. 2019-1 a ballot, the full text of which shall be as set forth in Exhibit G hereto and shall be included in the ballot pamphlet mailed to each qualified elector. A copy of the waiver and consent form signed by the property owner is attached hereto as Exhibit E and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 10. That the Mayor and City Council finds this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that the activity is covered by the general rule 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, as in this case, 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. SECTION 11. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable. SECTION 12. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately. APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 6th day of November 2024. Helen Tran, Mayor City of San Bernardino Attest: Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk Approved as to form: Sonia Carvalho, City Attorney        Packet Page. 176 Resolution No. 2024-215 Resolution No. 2024-215 November 6, 2024 Page 4 of 4 5 5 8 0 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) I, Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2024-215, adopted at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of November 2024 by the following vote: Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT SANCHEZ _____ _____ _______ _______ IBARRA _____ _____ _______ _______ FIGUEROA _____ _____ _______ _______ SHORETT _____ _____ _______ _______ REYNOSO _____ _____ _______ _______ CALVIN _____ _____ _______ _______ ALEXANDER _____ _____ _______ _______ WITNESS my hand and official seal of the City of San Bernardino this ____ day of ____________ 2024. Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk        Packet Page. 177 EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED TERRITORY TO BE ANNEXED The City of San Bernardino Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) (the “CFD No. 2019-1”) Annexation No. 48 is currently comprised one (1) parcel, located within the City boundaries. The property is identified by the following San Bernardino County Assessor's Parcel Number (APN). APN Owner Name 1199-671-13 Piedmont Venture I, LLC        Packet Page. 178 EXHIBIT B DESCRIPTION OF AUTHORIZED SERVICES The services which may be funded with proceeds of the special tax of CFD No. 2019-1, as provided by Section 53313 of the Act, will include all costs attributable to maintaining, servicing, cleaning, repairing and/or replacing landscaped areas (may include reserves for replacement) in public street right-of-ways, public landscaping, public open spaces and other similar landscaped areas officially dedicated for public use. These services including the following: (a) maintenance and lighting of parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space, which maintenance and lighting services may include, without limitation, furnishing of electrical power to street lights and traffic signals; repair and replacement of damaged or inoperative light bulbs, fixtures and standards; maintenance (including irrigation and replacement) of landscaping vegetation situated on or adjacent to parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space; maintenance and repair of irrigation facilities; maintenance of public signage; graffiti removal from and maintenance and repair of public structures situated on parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space; maintenance and repair of playground or recreation program equipment or facilities situated on any park; and (b) maintenance and operation of water quality improvements which include storm drainage and flood protection facilities, including, without limitation, drainage inlets, catch basin inserts, infiltration basins, flood control channels, fossil fuel filters, and similar facilities. Maintenance services may include but is not limited to the repair, removal or replacement of all or part of any of the water quality improvements, fossil fuel filters within the public right-of-way including the removal of petroleum hydrocarbons and other pollutants from water runoff, or appurtenant facilities, clearing of inlets and outlets; erosion repairs; and cleanup to improvements, and other items necessary for the maintenance, servicing; or both of the water quality basin improvements within flood control channel improvements; and (c) public street sweeping, on the segments of the arterials within the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1; as well as local roads within residential subdivisions located within CFD No. 2019-1; and any portions adjacent to the properties within CFD No. 2019-1. In addition to payment of the cost and expense of the forgoing services, proceeds of the special tax may be expended to pay “Administrative Expenses,” as said term is defined in Exhibit B to this resolution of intention. The above services shall be limited to those provided within the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1 or for the benefit of the properties within the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1, as the boundary is expanded from time to time by anticipated annexations, and said services may be financed by proceeds of the special tax of CFD No. 2019-1 only to the extent that they are in addition to those provided in the territory of CFD No. 2019-1 before CFD No. 2019-1 was created.        Packet Page. 179 EXHIBIT C City of San Bernardino 1 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO A Special Tax (the “Special Tax”) shall be levied on and collected from each Assessor’s Parcel (defined below) in Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) (the “CFD No. 2019-1” or “CFD”; defined below), in each Fiscal Year, (defined below), commencing in the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2019, in an amount determined by the City Council of the City of San Bernardino, acting in its capacity as the legislative body of CFD No. 2019-1, by applying the rate and method of apportionment set forth below. All of the real property in CFD No. 2019-1, unless exempted by law or by the provisions herein, shall be taxed to the extent and in the manner provided herein. A. DEFINITIONS “Acre” or “Acreage” means the land area of an Assessor’s Parcel as shown on any Assessor’s Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on the Assessor’s Parcel Map, the land area as shown on the applicable Final Map, or if the area is not shown on the applicable Final Map, the land area shall be calculated by the Administrator. “Administrative Expenses” means the actual or reasonably estimated costs directly related to the formation, annexation, and administration of CFD No. 2019-1 including, but not limited to: the costs of computing the Special Taxes and preparing the annual Special Tax collection schedules (whether by the City or designee thereof or both); the costs to the City, CFD No. 2019-1, or any designee thereof associated with fulfilling the CFD No. 2019-1 disclosure requirements; the costs associated with responding to public inquiries regarding the Special Taxes; the costs of the City, CFD No. 2019-1 or any designee thereof related to an appeal of the Special Tax; and the City's annual administration fees including payment of a proportional share of salaries and benefits of any City employees and City overhead whose duties are related to the administration and third party expenses. Administrative Expenses shall also include amounts estimated or advanced by the City or CFD No. 2019-1 for any other administrative purposes of CFD No. 2019-1, including attorney's fees and other costs related to commencing and pursuing to completion any foreclosure of delinquent Special Taxes. “Administrator” means the City Manager of the City of San Bernardino, or his or her designee. “Approved Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property that are included in a Final Map that was recorded prior to the March 1 preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied, and that have not been issued a building permit on or prior to the June 1 preceding the Fiscal year in which the special tax is being levied. “Assessor’s Parcel” means a lot or parcel of land that is identifiable by an Assessor’s Parcel Number by the County Assessor of the County of San Bernardino. “Assessor’s Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels by Assessor’s Parcel Number. “Assessor’s Parcel Number” means that identification number assigned to a parcel by the County Assessor of the County.        Packet Page. 180 City of San Bernardino 2 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) “Building Square Footage” or “BSF” means the floor area square footage reflected on the original construction building permit issued for construction of a building of Non-Residential Property and any Building Square Footage subsequently added to a building of such Taxable Property after issuance of a building permit for expansion or renovation of such building. “Calendar Year” means the period commencing January 1 of any year and ending the following December 31. “CFD” or “CFD No. 2019-1” means the City of San Bernardino Community Facilities District No. 2019- 1 (Maintenance Services). “City” means the City of San Bernardino. “Contingent Special Tax B Requirement” means that amount required in any Fiscal Year, if the POA is unable to maintain the Service(s) to: (i) pay the costs of Services incurred or otherwise payable in the Calendar Year commencing in such Fiscal Year; (ii) fund an operating reserve for the costs of Services as determined by the Administrator; less a credit for funds available to reduce the annual Special Tax B (Contingent) levy as determined by the Administrator. “County” means the County of San Bernardino. “Developed Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property for which a building permit for new construction has been issued on or prior to June 1 preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied. “Exempt Property” means all Assessors’ Parcels designated as being exempt from the Special Tax as provided for in Section G. “Final Map” means a subdivision of property by recordation of a final map, parcel map, or lot line adjustment, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.) or recordation of a condominium plan pursuant to California Civil Code 1352 that creates individual lots for which building permits may be issued without further subdivision. “Fiscal Year” means the period from and including July 1st of any year to and including the following June 30th. “Land Use Category” or “LUC” means any of the categories contained in Section B hereof to which an Assessor’s Parcel is assigned consistent with the land use approvals that have been received or proposed for the Assessor’s Parcel as of June 1 preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied. “Maximum Special Tax” means either Maximum Special Tax A and/or Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent), as applicable. “Maximum Special Tax A” means the Maximum Special Tax A, as determined in accordance with Section C below that can be levied in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property within CFD No. 2019-1.        Packet Page. 181 City of San Bernardino 3 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) “Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent)” means the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent), as determined in accordance with Section C below that can be levied in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property within CFD No. 2019-1. “Multi-Family Residential Property” means any Assessor’s Parcel of residential property that consists of a building or buildings comprised of attached Residential Units sharing at least one common wall with another unit. “Non-Residential Property” or “NR” means all Assessor's Parcels of Taxable Property for which a building permit(s) was issued for a non-residential use. The Administrator shall make the determination if an Assessor’s Parcel is Non-Residential Property. “Property Owner’s Association” or “POA” means the property owner’s association or homeowner’s association established to maintain certain landscaping within a Tax Zone. “Proportionately” means for Taxable Property that is: (i) Developed Property, that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy to the Maximum Special Tax is the same for all Parcels of Developed Property with the same Tax Zone, (ii) Approved Property, that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy to the Maximum Special Tax is the same for all Parcels of Approved Property with the same Tax Zone, and (iii) Undeveloped Property that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy per acre to the Maximum Special Tax per acre is the same for all Parcels of Undeveloped Property with the same Tax Zone. “Residential Unit” or "RU" means a residential unit that is used or intended to be used as a domicile by one or more persons, as determined by the Administrator. “Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property upon which completed Residential Units have been constructed or for which building permits have been or may be issued for purposes of constructing one or more Residential Units. “Service(s)” means services permitted under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 including, without limitation, those services authorized to be funded by CFD No. 2019-1 as set forth in the documents adopted by the City Council at the time the CFD was formed. “Single Family Residential Property” means any residential property other than Multi-Family Residential Property on an Assessor’s Parcel. “Special Tax(es)” means the Special Tax A and/or Special Tax B (Contingent) to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property. “Special Tax A” means the annual special tax to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property to fund the Special Tax A Requirement. "Special Tax A Requirement" means for each Tax Zone, that amount to be collected in any Fiscal Year to pay for certain costs as required to meet the needs for such Tax Zone of CFD No. 2019-1 in both the current Fiscal Year and the next Fiscal Year. The costs to be covered shall be the direct costs for maintenance services including but not limited to (i) maintenance and lighting of parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space, (ii) maintenance and operation of water quality improvements, (iii) public street sweeping, (iv) fund an operating reserve for the costs of Services as determined by the Administrator, and (v) Administrative Expenses. Under no circumstances shall the Special Tax A Requirement include funds for Bonds.        Packet Page. 182 City of San Bernardino 4 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) “Special Tax B (Contingent)” means the Special Tax B (Contingent) to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property to fund the Contingent Special Tax B Requirement, if required. "Taxable Property" means all Assessor’s Parcels within CFD No. 2019-1, which are not Exempt Property. “Taxable Unit” means a Residential Unit, Building Square Footage, or an Acre. "Tax Zone" means a mutually exclusive geographic area, within which particular Special Tax rates may be levied pursuant to this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax. Appendix C identifies the Tax Zone in CFD No. 2019-1 at formation; additional Tax Zones may be created when property is annexed into the CFD. "Tax Zone 1" means the specific geographic area identified on the CFD Boundary Map as Tax Zone 1. "Tract(s)" means an area of land; i) within a subdivision identified by a particular tract number on a Final Map, ii) identified within a Parcel Map; or iii) identified within lot line adjustment approved for subdivision. “Undeveloped Property” means, for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property not classified as Developed Property or Approved Property. B. ASSIGNMENT TO LAND USE CATEGORIES For each Fiscal Year, all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property within CFD No. 2019-1 shall be classified as Developed Property, Approved Property, or Undeveloped Property, and shall be subject to the levy of Special Taxes as determined pursuant to Sections C and D below. Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property and Approved Property shall be classified as either Residential Property or Non-Residential Property. Residential Property shall be further classified as Single Family Residential Property or Multi-Family Residential Property and the number of Residential Units shall be determined by the Administrator. C. MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATES For purposes of determining the applicable Maximum Special Tax for Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property and Approved Property which are classified as Residential Property, all such Assessor’s Parcels shall be assigned the number of Residential Unit(s) constructed or to be constructed thereon as specified in or shown on the building permit(s) issued or Final Map as determined by the Administrator. For Parcels of undeveloped property zoned for development of single family attached or multi-family units, the number of Residential Units shall be determined by referencing the condominium plan, apartment plan, site plan or other development plan, or by assigning the maximum allowable units permitted based on the underlying zoning for the Parcel. Once a single family attached or multi-family building or buildings have been built on an Assessor's Parcel, the Administrator shall determine the actual number of Residential Units contained within the building or buildings, and the Special Tax A levied against the Parcel in the next Fiscal Year shall be calculated by multiplying the actual number of Residential Units by the Maximum Special Tax per Residential Unit identified for the Tract below or as included in Appendix A as each Annexation occurs. For purposes of determining the applicable Maximum Special Tax for Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property and Approved Property which are classified as Non-Residential Property, all such Assessor’s        Packet Page. 183 City of San Bernardino 5 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) Parcels shall be assigned the number of Building Square Footage or Acres as shown on the Final Map as determined by the Administrator. Once the Administrator determines the actual number of Building Square Footage or Acres for the Assessor’s Parcels, the Special Tax A levied against the Assessor’s Parcel in the next Fiscal Year shall be calculated by multiplying the number of Building Square Footage or Acres by the Maximum Special Tax per Taxable Unit identified for the Tax Zone below or as included in Appendix A as each Annexation occurs. 1. Special Tax A a. Developed Property (i) Maximum Special Tax A The Maximum Special Tax A for each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be specific to each Tax Zone within the CFD. When additional property is annexed into CFD No. 2019-1, the rate and method adopted for the annexed property shall reflect the Maximum Special Tax A for the Tax Zones annexed and included in Appendix A. The Maximum Special Tax A for Developed Property for Fiscal Year 2019-2020 within Tax Zone 1 is identified in Table 1 below: TABLE 1 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX A RATES DEVELOPED PROPERTY Tax Zone Tract Land Use Category Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax A 1 TR 17170 Single Family Residential Property RU $961 (ii) Increase in the Maximum Special Tax A On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax A for Developed Property shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater. (iii) Multiple Land Use Categories In some instances an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property may contain more than one Land Use Category. The Maximum Special Tax A that can be levied on an Assessor's Parcel shall be the sum of the Maximum Special Tax A that can be levied for each Land Use Category located on that Assessor's Parcel. For an Assessor's Parcel that contains more than one land use, the Acreage of such Assessor's Parcel shall be allocated to each type of property based on the amount of Acreage designated for each land use as determined by reference to the site plan approved for such Assessor's Parcel. The Administrator's allocation to each type of property shall be final. b. Approved Property The Maximum Special Tax A for each Assessor’s Parcel of Approved Property shall be specific to each Tax Zone within the CFD. When additional property is annexed into CFD No. 2019-1, the rate and method adopted for the annexed property shall reflect the Maximum Special Tax A for the Tax Zone annexed and included in Appendix A. The Maximum Special Tax A for Approved property Fiscal Year 2019-20 within Tax Zone 1 is identified in Table 2 below:        Packet Page. 184 City of San Bernardino 6 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) TABLE 2 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX A RATES APPROVED PROPERTY Tax Zone Tract Land Use Category Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax A 1 TR 17170 Single Family Residential RU $961 On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax A for Approved Property shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater. c. Undeveloped Property The Maximum Special Tax A for each Assessor’s Parcel of Undeveloped Property shall be specific to each Tax Zone within the CFD. When additional property is annexed into CFD No. 2019-1, the rate and method adopted for the annexed property shall reflect the Maximum Special Tax A for the Tax Zone annexed and included in Appendix A. The Maximum Special Tax A for Undeveloped Property for Fiscal Year 2019-20 within Tax Zone 1 is identified in Table 3 below: TABLE 3 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX A RATES UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY Tax Zone Tracts Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax A 1 TR 17170 Acre $4,338 On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax A for Undeveloped Property shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater. 2. Special Tax B (Contingent) The City Council shall levy Special Tax B (Contingent) only in the event the POA defaults in its obligation to maintain the Contingent Services, which default shall be deemed to have occurred, as determined by the Administrator, in each of the following circumstances: (a) The POA files for bankruptcy; (b) The POA is dissolved; (c) The POA ceases to levy annual assessments for the Contingent Services; or (d) The POA fails to provide the Contingent Services at the same level as the City provides similar services and maintains similar improvements throughout the City and within ninety (90) days after written notice from the City, or such longer period permitted by the City Manager, fails to remedy the deficiency to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Council. a. Developed Property (i) Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent)        Packet Page. 185 City of San Bernardino 7 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property is shown in Table 4 and shall be specific to each Tax Zone within the CFD. When additional property is annexed into CFD No. 2019-1, the rate and method adopted for the annexed property shall reflect the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for each Tax Zones annexed and included in Appendix A. The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Fiscal Year 2019-20 within Tax Zone 1 is identified in Table 4 below: TABLE 4 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX B (CONTINGENT) RATES DEVELOPED PROPERTY Tax Zone Tract Land Use Category Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) 1 TR 17170 Single Family Residential Property RU $0 (ii) Increase in the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Developed Property shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater. (iii) Multiple Land Use Categories In some instances an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property may contain more than one Land Use Category. The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) that can be levied on an Assessor's Parcel shall be the sum of the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) that can be levied for each Land Use Category located on that Assessor's Parcel. For an Assessor's Parcel that contains more than one land use, the Acreage of such Assessor's Parcel shall be allocated to each type of property based on the amount of Acreage designated for each land use as determined by reference to the site plan approved for such Assessor's Parcel. The Administrator's allocation to each type of property shall be final. b. Approved Property The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property is shown in Table 5 and shall be specific to each Tax Zone within the CFD. When additional property is annexed into CFD No. 2019-1, the rate and method adopted for the annexed property shall reflect the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for the Tax Zone annexed and included in Appendix A. The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Fiscal Year 2019-20 within the Tax Zone is identified in Table 5 below: TABLE 5 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX B (CONTINGENT) RATES APPROVED PROPERTY Tax Zone Tract Land Use Category Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) 1 TR 17170 Single Family Residential Property RU $0 On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Approved Property shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for        Packet Page. 186 City of San Bernardino 8 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater. c. Undeveloped Property The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property is shown in Table 6 and shall be specific to each Tax Zone within the CFD. When additional property is annexed into CFD No. 2019-1, the rate and method adopted for the annexed property shall reflect the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for the Tax Zone annexed and included in Appendix A. The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Fiscal Year 2019-20 within the Tax Zone is identified in Table 6 below: TABLE 6 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX B (CONTINGENT) RATES UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY Tax Zone Tracts Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) 1 TR 17170 Acre $0 On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Undeveloped Property shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater. D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX 1. Special Tax A Commencing with Fiscal Year 2019-20 and for each following Fiscal Year, the Council shall determine the Special Tax A Requirement and shall levy the Special Tax A on all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property until the aggregate amount of Special Tax A equals the Special Tax A Requirement for each Tax Zone. The Special Tax A shall be levied for each Fiscal Year as follows: First: The Special Tax A shall be levied Proportionately on all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property within each Tax Zone up to 100% of the applicable Maximum Special Tax to satisfy the Special Tax A Requirement for such Tax Zone; Second: If additional moneys are needed to satisfy the Special Tax A Requirement for a Tax Zone after the first step has been completed, the Special Tax A shall be levied Proportionately on each Parcel of Approved Property within such Tax Zone up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax A for Approved Property; Third: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax A Requirement for a Tax Zone after the first two steps has been completed, the Special Tax A shall be levied Proportionately on all Assessor’s Parcels of Undeveloped Property within such Tax Zone up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax A for Undeveloped Property. 2. Special Tax B (Contingent) Commencing with Fiscal Year in which Special Tax B (Contingent) is authorized to be levied and for each following Fiscal Year, the City Council shall determine the Contingent Special Tax B (Contingent) Requirement for each Tax Zone, if any, and shall levy the Special Tax on all Assessor’s Parcels of        Packet Page. 187 City of San Bernardino 9 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) Taxable Property within such Tax Zone until the aggregate amount of Special Tax B (Contingent) equals the Special Tax B ( Contingent) Requirement for such Tax Zone. The Special Tax B (Contingent) Shall be levied for each Fiscal Year as follows: First: The Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for a Tax Zone up to 100% of the applicable Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) to satisfy the Contingent Special Tax B Requirement; Second: If additional moneys are needed to satisfy the Contingent Special Tax B Requirement after the first step has been completed, the Special Tax B (Contingent) shall be levied Proportionately on each Parcel of Approved Property within such Tax Zone up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Approved Property; Third: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Contingent Special Tax B Requirement after the first two steps has been completed, the Special Tax B (Contingent) shall be levied Proportionately on all Assessor’s Parcels of Undeveloped Property within such Tax Zone up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Undeveloped Property. E. FUTURE ANNEXATIONS It is anticipated that additional properties will be annexed to CFD No. 2019-1 from time to time. As each annexation is proposed, an analysis will be prepared to determine the annual cost for providing Services. Based on this analysis, the property to be annexed, pursuant to California Government Code section 53339 et seq. will be assigned to the appropriate Maximum Special Tax rate for the Tax Zone when annexed and included in Appendix A. F. DURATION OF SPECIAL TAX For each Fiscal Year, the Special Tax A shall be levied as long as the Services are being provided. For each Fiscal Year, the Special Tax B (Contingent) shall be levied as long as the Contingent Services are being provided. G. EXEMPTIONS The City shall classify as Exempt Property within CFD No. 2019-1, any Assessor’s Parcels; (i) which are owned by, irrevocably offered for dedication, encumbered by or restricted in use by any public entity; (ii) with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the easement; (iii) which are privately owned but are encumbered by or restricted solely for public uses; or (iv) which is in use in the performance of a public function as determined by the Administrator. H. APPEALS Any property owner claiming that the amount or application of the Special Taxes are not correct may file a written notice of appeal with the City not later than twelve months after having paid the first installment of the Special Tax that is disputed. A representative(s) of CFD No. 2019-1 shall promptly review the appeal, and if necessary, meet with the property owner, consider written and oral evidence regarding the amount of the Special Tax, and rule on the appeal. If the representative’s decision requires that the Special Tax for an Assessor’s Parcel be modified or changed in favor of the property owner, a cash refund shall not be made, but an adjustment shall be made to the Special Tax on that Assessor’s Parcel in the subsequent Fiscal Year(s).        Packet Page. 188 City of San Bernardino 10 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) I. MANNER OF COLLECTION The Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes, provided, however, that CFD No. 2019-1 may collect the Special Tax at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet its financial obligations.        Packet Page. 189 City of San Bernardino 11 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) APPENDIX A CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) COST ESTIMATE Special Tax A Services - The estimate breaks down the costs of providing one year's maintenance services for Fiscal Year 2024-25. These services are being funded by the levy of Special Tax A for Community Facilities District No. 2019-1. TAX ZONE 48 1199-671-13 Item Description Estimated Cost 1 Lighting $144 2 Streets $2,558 3 Parks $6,397 4 Graffiti $323 5 Reserves $1,413 6 Admin $1,250 Total $12,086 Special Tax B Contingent Services – There are no services being funded by the levy of Special Tax B (Contingent) for Community Facilities District No. 2019-1. However, additional Tax Zones may have Special Tax B Contingent Services being provided. TAX ZONE 48 FY 2024-25 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATES DEVELOPED PROPERTY AND APPROVED PROPERTY Land Use Category Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax A Maximum Special Tax B Single Family Residential RU $247 $0 Multi-Family Residential RU $247 0 Non-Residential Property Acre $1,777 $0 TAX ZONE 48 FY 2024-25 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATES UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax A Maximum Special Tax B Acre $1,777 $0        Packet Page. 190 City of San Bernardino 12 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) TAX ZONE SUMMARY Annexation Tax Zone Tract APN Fiscal Year Maximum Special Tax A Maximum Special Tax B Subdivider Original 1 17170 2019-20 $961 / RU $0 / RU Santiago Communities, Inc. 1 2 17329 2019-20 $473 / RU $0 / RU JEC Enterprises, Inc. 2 3 PM 19814 2020-21 $608 / Acre $0 / Acre GWS #4 Development, LLC 3 4 0266-041-39 2019-20 $1,136 / Acre $0 / Acre Devore Storage Facility, LLC 4 5 TR 20006 2020-21 $344 / RU $57 / RU TH Rancho Palma, LLC 5 6 PM 19701 2020-21 $1,895 / Acre $528 / Acre Strata Palma, LLC 6 7 PM 20112 2020-21 $3,197 / Acre $0 / Acre San Bernardino Medical Center LLC 7 8 TR 20293 2021-22 $2,913 / Acre $334 / Acre ICO Fund VI, LLC 8 9 LM 2019-021 2021-22 $815 / Acre $232 / Acre TR 2600 Cajon Industrial LLC 9 10 TR 20189 2021-22 $490 / Acre $154 / Acre Central Commerce Center, LLC 10 11 LD 1900086 2021-22 $1,472 / Acre $0 / Acre Lankershim Industrial, LLC 11 12 TR 20305 2022-23 $175 / Acre $0 / Acre Prologis, LP 12 13 LLA 2020-004 2022-23 $1,169 / Acre $0 / Acre Dreamland Real Estate Holdings 13 14 TR 5907 2022-23 $2,268 / Acre $0 / Acre Magic Laundry Services, Inc. 14 15 0136-191-21 2022-23 $5,277 / Acre $0 / Acre Ahmad Family Trust 15 16 TR 20216 2022-23 $7,089 / Acre $0 / Acre Gateway SB, LLC 16 17 TR 20145 2022-23 $646 / RU $0 / RU RCH-CWI Belmont, LP 17 18 CUP 20-07 2022-23 $7,433 / Acre $0 / Acre George A. Pearson 18 19 TR 20258 2022-23 $588 / RU $0 / RU RGC Family Trust 19 20 LM 21-10 2022-23 $5,284 / Acre $0 / Acre 170 East 40th Street, LLC 20 21 LM 22-04 2022-23 $6,397 / Acre $0 / Acre 108 Highland, LP 21 22 LM 2021-013 2022-23 $807 / Acre $0 / Acre SBABP IV, LLC 22 23 TR 4592 2022-23 $847 / Acre $320 / Acre 1300 E Highland Ave LLC 23 24 LLA 2020-005 2022-23 $1,385 / Acre $978 / Acre Vone SB, LLC 24 25 TR 20494 2022-23 $174 / RU $17 / RU PI Properties, LLC 25 26 TR 20495 2022-23 $204 / RU $45 / RU Pacific West Company, et al. 26 To Be Determined 27 28 PM 20320 2022-23 $1,851 / Acre $292 / Acre SB Drake Central Avenue LLC 28 29 TR 17329 2023-24 $595 / RU $0 / RU Verdemont Ranch 20, LLC 29 30 LL 2022-11 2022-23 $922 / Acre $372 / Acre CIVF VI – CA1W01, LLC 30 31 PM 20143 2022-23 $2,957 / Acre $1,855 / Acre California Cajun Properties LLC 31 32 PM 20334 2023-24 $358 / Acre $94 / Acre Elliott Precision Block Co. 32 33 PM 3613, 4230 & 4250 2022-23 $1,094 / Acre $186 / Acre S.B. Universal Self Storage LLC 33 34 PM 20392 2023-24 $2,785 / Acre $158 / Acre GWS#7 Development, LLC 34 35 CUP 21-16 2023-24 $533 / Acre $193 / Acre MLG SB Land LLC & Grandfather’s Land Holdings LLC 35 36 CUP 22-03 2023-24 $6,648 / Acre $0 / Acre SimonCRE JC Saguaro III, LLC 36 37 LM 2022-007 2023-24 $1,261 / Acre $0 / Acre DP Industrial Parkway LLC 37 38 TR 18895 2023-24 $706 / RU $0 / Acre MV RE Holdings LLC 38 39 LLA 2023-008 2023-24 $3,081 / Acre $0 / Acre In-N-Out Burgers, a California Corporation 39 40 LM 2022-19 2023-24 $473 / Acre $0 / Acre PME Oakmont Tippecanoe LP 40 41 LLA 2023-010 2023-24 $2,132 / Acre $0 / Acre Shandon Hills Plaza LLC 41 42 PM 20216 2023-24 $7,925 / Acre $0 / Acre Inland Maple Partners LLC        Packet Page. 191 City of San Bernardino 13 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) Annexation Tax Zone Tract APN Fiscal Year Maximum Special Tax A Maximum Special Tax B Subdivider 43 43 PM 20527 2023-24 $7,172 / Acre $0 / Acre Gateway SB LLC 44 44 PM 18704 2023-24 $1,672 / Acre $0 / Acre Paladin Equity SB LLC 45 45 PM 20412 2023-24 $1,826 / Acre $0 / Acre GWS #8 Development, LLC 46 46 To be determined 47 47 To be determined 48 48 1199-671-13 2024-25 $247/RU $0/RU Piedmont Venture I, LLC 49 49 To be determined ESCALATION OF MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAXES On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater.        Packet Page. 192 City of San Bernardino 14 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) APPENDIX B CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) DESCRIPTION OF AUTHORIZED SERVICES The services which may be funded with proceeds of the special tax of CFD No. 2019-1, as provided by Section 53313 of the Act, will include all costs attributable to maintaining, servicing, cleaning, repairing and/or replacing landscaped areas (may include reserves for replacement) in public street right-of-ways, public landscaping, public open spaces and other similar landscaped areas officially dedicated for public use. These services including the following: (a) maintenance and lighting of parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space, which maintenance and lighting services may include, without limitation, furnishing of electrical power to street lights and traffic signals; repair and replacement of damaged or inoperative light bulbs, fixtures and standards; maintenance (including irrigation and replacement) of landscaping vegetation situated on or adjacent to parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space; maintenance and repair of irrigation facilities; maintenance of public signage; graffiti removal from and maintenance and repair of public structures situated on parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space; maintenance and repair of playground or recreation program equipment or facilities situated on any park; and (b) maintenance and operation of water quality improvements which include storm drainage and flood protection facilities, including, without limitation, drainage inlets, catch basin inserts, infiltration basins, flood control channels, fossil fuel filters, and similar facilities. Maintenance services may include but is not limited to the repair, removal or replacement of all or part of any of the water quality improvements, fossil fuel filters within the public right-of-way including the removal of petroleum hydrocarbons and other pollutants from water runoff, or appurtenant facilities, clearing of inlets and outlets; erosion repairs; and cleanup to improvements, and other items necessary for the maintenance, servicing; or both of the water quality basin improvements within flood control channel improvements; and (c) public street sweeping, on the segments of the arterials within the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1; as well as local roads within residential subdivisions located within CFD No. 2019-1; and any portions adjacent to the properties within CFD No. 2019-1; and In addition to payment of the cost and expense of the forgoing services, proceeds of the special tax may be expended to pay “Administrative Expenses,” as said term is defined in the Rate and Method of Apportionment. The above services shall be limited to those provided within the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1 or for the benefit of the properties within the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1, as the boundary is expanded from time to time by anticipated annexations, and said services may be financed by proceeds of the special tax of CFD No. 2019-1 only to the extent that they are in addition to those provided in the territory of CFD No. 2019-1 before CFD No. 2019-1 was created.        Packet Page. 193 City of San Bernardino 15 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) APPENDIX C CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) PROPOSED BOUNDARIES AND POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA BOUNDARIES        Packet Page. 194 EXHIBIT D SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEETANNEXATION MAP NO. 48 COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIS MAP SHOWS THE BOUNDARIES OF AREAS TO BE ANNEXED TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES), OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE THIS MAP WAS FILED UNDER DOCUMENT _____________, THIS _______ DAY OF _______, 20 ____, AT _____ M. IN BOOK _____ OF ______________ AT PAGE ____, AT THE REQUEST OF CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO IN THE AMOUNT OF $_____________. NUMBER THE BOUNDARIES OF WHICH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT ARE SHOWN AND DESCRIBED ON THE MAP THEREOF WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY RECORDED ON JUNE 6, 2019 IN BOOK 88 OF MAPS OF ASSESSMENT AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AT PAGE 32 AND AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2019-0185323 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. CHRIS WILHITE ASSESSOR-RECORDER SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY BY:________________________________ DEPUTY RECORDER I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE WITHIN MAP SHOWING PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) FOR THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AT ON THE ____ DAY OF ____________________, A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF, HELD 20 ____. BY ITS RESOLUTION NO. ____________________ _________________________________________ CITY CLERK, CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO 48 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK THIS _____ DAY OF ________, 20 ____.1199-671-13 _________________________________________ CITY CLERK, CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO þ 18 þ 330 CFD 2019-1 TAX ZONE 48þ 210þ 259 LEGEND¤ 66 _ ANNEXATION AREA BOUNDARY PARCEL LINE §¦215 CITY BOUNDARY þ 38§¦ 10 XXXX-XXX-XX 48 ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER TAX ZONE-THIS ANNEXATION MAP CORRECTLY SHOWS THE LOT OR PARCEL OF LAND INCLUDED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT. FOR DETAILS CONCERNING THE LINES AND DIMENSIONS OF LOTS OR PARCEL REFER TO THE COUNTY ASSESSOR MAPS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024-25.        Packet Page. 195 EXHIBIT E        Packet Page. 196        Packet Page. 197 EXHIBIT F NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON INTENTION TO ANNEX TERRITORY TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) (ANNEXATION NO. 48) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of San Bernardino on November 6, 2024 adopted its Resolution No. 2024-___, in which it declared its intention to annex territory to existing Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) (the "CFD No. 2019-1"), and to levy a special tax to pay for certain maintenance services, all pursuant to the provisions of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the California Government Code. The resolution describes the territory to be annexed and describes the rate and method of apportionment of the proposed special tax. No change in the tax levied in the existing CFD No. 2019-1 is proposed. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the City Council has fixed 5:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as practicable, Wednesday, December 18, 2024 at the Bing Wong Auditorium of the Norman F. Feldheym Public Library at 555 W. 6th Street, San Bernardino, California, as the time and place when and where the City Council will conduct a public hearing on the annexation of territory to CFD No. 2019-1. At the hearing, the testimony of all interest persons for or against the annexation of the territory or the levying of the special taxes will be heard. If and to the extent participation in the December 18, 2024 meeting must occur by teleconference, videoconference, or other electronic means authorized by the Ralph M. Brown Act or an Executive Order of the Governor of California, the means and methods for participating the meeting shall be posted on the Agenda for said meeting, which shall be posted at least 72 hours prior to the meeting on the City of San Bernardino (www.sbcity.org), and outside of the Bing Wong Auditorium of the Norman F. Feldheym Public Library at 555 W. 6th Street, San Bernardino, California, 92410. A copy of the Agenda will be made available upon request to the San Bernardino City Clerk's office at 909-384-5002. DATED: ____________, 2024 _________________________________________ City Clerk of the City of San Bernardino PUB: _______________, 2024        Packet Page. 198 EXHIBIT G CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) ANNEXATION NO. 48 (December 18, 2024) This ballot is for the use of the authorized representative of the following owner of land within Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) (“CFD No. 2019-1”) of the City of San Bernardino: Name of Landowner Number of Acres Owned Total Votes Piedmont Venture I, LLC 6.79 7 According to the provisions of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, and resolutions of the City Council (the “Council”) of the City of San Bernardino (the “City”), the above-named landowner is entitled to cast the number of votes shown above under the heading “Total Votes,” representing the total votes for the property owned by said landowner. The City has sent the enclosed ballot to you so that you may vote on whether or not to approve the special tax. This special tax ballot is for the use of the property owner of the parcels identified below, which parcels are located within the territory proposed to form the CFD No. 2019-1, City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California. Please advise the City Clerk, at (909) 384-5002 if the name set forth below is incorrect or if you are no longer one of the owners of these parcels. This special tax ballot may be used to express either support for or opposition to the proposed special tax. To be counted, this special tax ballot must be signed below by the owner or, if the owner is not an individual, by an authorized representative of the owner. The ballot must then be delivered to the City Clerk, either by mail or in person, as follows: Mail Delivery: Personal Delivery: If by mail, place ballot in the return envelope provided, and mail no later than December 4, 2024, two calendar weeks prior to the date set for the election. Mailing later than this deadline creates the risk that the special tax ballot may not be received in time to be counted. If in person, deliver to the City Clerk at any time up to 5:00 p.m. on December 18, 2024, at the Clerk’s office at 201 N. “E” Street, Bldg A, City of San Bernardino, CA 92401. However delivered, this ballot must be received by the Clerk prior to the close of the public meeting on December 18, 2024. Very truly yours, Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk        Packet Page. 199 TO CAST THIS BALLOT, PLEASE RETURN THIS ENTIRE PAGE. OFFICIAL SPECIAL TAX BALLOT Name & Address of Property Owner: Assessor’s Parcel Number(s): Piedmont Venture I, LLC Attn: Ali Sahabi 2014 Ashington Dr., Glendale, CA 91206 1199-671-13 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) AN “X” OR OTHER MARK WILL CAST ALL VOTES ASSIGNED TO THIS BALLOT SPECIAL TAX BALLOT MEASURE MARK “YES” OR “NO” WITH AN “X”: Shall the City Council of the City of San Bernardino be authorized to levy a special tax on an annual basis at the rate set forth in the following table: Land Use Category Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax A Single Family Residential RU $247 plus an annual increase on each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2025 the Maximum Special Tax shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Riverside - San Bernardino - Ontario (December 2017 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater, to finance certain services within the territory identified on the map entitled “Annexation Map No. 48 of Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) City of San Bernardino” including lighting, streets, parks, and graffiti as provided in the Rate and Method of Apportionment (including incidental expenses) which is attached as Exhibit C to Resolution No. 2024-__ adopted by the City Council of the City of San Bernardino on November 6, 2024, and shall an appropriation limit be established for the Community Facilities District No. 2019- 1 (Maintenance Services) in the amount of special taxes collected? YES _________ NO _________ Certification for Special Election Ballot The undersigned is an authorized representative of the above-named landowner and is the person legally authorized and entitled to cast this ballot on behalf of the above-named landowner. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration is executed on ____________, 20__. Ali Sahabi Manager Signature Print Name Title        Packet Page. 200 EXHIBIT H        Packet Page. 201 ORCHID DR PIE D MO NT DR PIEDMONTAVELAPRAIXAVEBRADFORDAVECROYDON ST 28TH ST CIENEGA DROLEAN D ER DR SEINEAVECITYCREEK330RDHIGHLAND AVE BOULDER AVE^_MOUNTIAN AVECITRUS ST PACIFIC ST FOOTHILL DR PARKDALE DR TIPPECANOE STORANGE STSEINEAVEHIGHLA NDAVE PIEDMONTDR BUC K E Y E ST CHURCH AVECLIFTON ST BUCK W HEAT AVE PALM AVEOLIVE TREE LNBURNS LN BASELINE ST VILLA CT29TH ST ·|}þ330 ·|}þ210 CFD NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES)ANNEXATION NO. 48 PROJECT MAP        Packet Page. 202 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Rochelle Clayton, Acting City Manager; Kenneth Chapa, Director of Economic Development Department:Economic Development Subject:Resolution Declaring Intent to Annex Territory: Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services): Annexation No. 47, Tax Zone No. 47 (Dutch Bros Coffee) (Ward 3) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-216 of the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, declaring its intention to annex territory into Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino, adopting a map of the area to be proposed (Annexation No. 47) and authorizing the levy of a special taxes therein. Executive Summary The recommended actions are the first step of the annexation process for the proposed development into Community Facilities District (“CFD”) No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services). The property owner has petitioned the City to annex into the City’s CFD to mitigate its impacts for maintenance service of public facilities as a result of the new development. The special taxes will be levied annually to offset general fund expenditures related to maintenance of public improvements within and for the benefit of the development. Background On June 5, 2019, the Mayor and City Council approved Resolution No. 2019-81 establishing Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino (the "CFD No. 2019-1" or "District") for the purpose of levying special taxes on parcels of taxable property to provide certain services which are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City. On July 17, 2019, the Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019-178,        Packet Page. 203 establishing CFD No. 2019-1 pursuant to the provisions of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (“Act”). CFD No. 2019-1 allows for the levy of special taxes on parcels of taxable property for the purpose of providing certain services which are necessary to meet increased demands placed by development upon the City. Discussion Development projects are subject to conditions of approval that require projects to form/annex a maintenance district. These districts apply an annual fee or special tax upon properties within the District which provide the revenue to offset the cost of maintenance of the public improvements necessary to serve the development. The Developer has agreed to initiate and conduct the CFD annexation proceedings pursuant to the Act. To that end, the Developer has submitted a "Consent and Waiver" form, which is on file in the City Clerk's office that authorizes the City to (1) hold the election and declare election results; (2) shorten election time requirements; (3) waive analysis and arguments; (4) waive all notice requirements relating to the conduct of the election immediately following the public hearing. The public facilities and services proposed to be financed within the territory to be annexed to the District are the following: 1. Maintenance of landscaping and other public improvements installed within the public rights-of-way; and 2. Public lighting and appurtenant facilities, including street lights within public rights-of-way and traffic signals; and 3. Maintenance of streets, including street sweeping, pavement management and sidewalks; and 4. City and County costs associated with the setting, levying and collection of the special tax, and in the administration of the District including the contract administration and for the collection of reserve funds. The proposed development includes approximately 2.71 gross acres of zoned commercial property. The property is located southeast of E Hospitality Ln, north of Harriman Pl., and west of S Tippecanoe Ave. This development will include a drive- thru restaurant as a new Tax Zone, No. 47, within CFD No. 2019-1, as shown in the boundary map and included in the Resolution of Intention as Exhibit “D”. In order to annex into CFD No. 2019-1, a Resolution of Intention to annex property must be approved to identify the facilities to be maintained and establish the maximum special tax for this Tax Zone. The Resolution of Intention shall also set the date and time for the public hearing. The rate and method of apportionment of the special tax for this Tax Zone, (Tax Zone No. 47), is included as Exhibit “C” to the Resolution of Intention. The maximum annual special tax for this development has been calculated to be $5,635 per acre for FY        Packet Page. 204 2024/25. Special Tax rate is proposed to escalate each year at the greater of Consumer Price Index (CPI) or 2%. Exhibit “H”, attached to the staff report is a maintenance exhibit to illustrate which services are being maintained by the CFD. In order to annex property to CFD No. 2019-1 pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code Section 53311 et seq., the City must adopt a series of three statutorily required Resolutions and an Ordinance which are summarized below. •Resolution declaring City intent to annex territory to Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 including the boundary of the area to be annexed and the rate and method of apportionment of special taxes within the annexation area (the special tax applies only to properties within the annexation area). •Resolution calling an election to submit to the qualified electors the question of levying a special tax within the area proposed to be annexed to the District. •Resolution declaring the results of the election and directing the recording of the notice of special tax lien. •Amend the Ordinance and order the levy and collection of special taxes in the District. The individual property owners in the CFD will be responsible for annual payments of special taxes. Upon full completion of the development, it is estimated that there will be an annual collection of special tax revenues of approximately $15,310 to be used to pay for maintenance costs. On March 1 of each year, every taxable unit for which a building permit has been issued within the boundaries of the CFD will be subject to the special tax for the ensuing Fiscal Year. If the anticipated costs of maintaining the facilities in any given Fiscal Year, prior to buildout of the project, exceeds the special tax revenues available from parcels for which building permits have been issued, then the special tax may also be applied to property within recorded final subdivision maps, as well as other undeveloped property within the boundaries of the CFD. With the adoption of the Resolution of Intention, the Public Hearing would be scheduled for December 18, 2024. 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals This project is consistent with Key Target No 1. Improved Operational & Financial Capacity and Key Target No 4. Economic Growth & Development. This project will contribute to ensure that the City is clean and attractive and provide infrastructure designed for long term economic growth. Fiscal Impact There is no fiscal impact to the City. All costs associated with annexation into the CFD have been borne by the Developer.        Packet Page. 205 Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-216 of the Mayor and City Council of San Bernardino, California, declaring its intention to annex territory into Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino, adopting a map of the area to be proposed (Annexation No. 47) and authorizing the levy of a special taxes therein. Attachments Attachment 1 – Resolution of Intention No. 2024-216 Attachment 2 – Exhibit A - Description of Territory Attachment 3 – Exhibit B - Description of Services Attachment 4 – Exhibit C - Rate and Method of Apportionment Attachment 5 – Exhibit D - Boundary Maps Attachment 6 – Exhibit E - Signed Petition Attachment 7 – Exhibit F - Notice of Public Hearing Attachment 8 – Exhibit G - Special Election Ballot Attachment 9 – Exhibit H - Maintenance Exhibit Attachment 10 – Project Map Ward: Third Ward Synopsis of Previous Council Actions: June 5, 2019 Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2019-81, a Resolution of Intention to form Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino (the “Resolution of Intention”), pursuant to the provisions of the “Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982”. July 17, 2019 Resolution No. 2019-178 was adopted establishing Community Facilities District No. 2019-1; Resolution No. 2019-179 was adopted declaring election results for Community Facilities District No. 2019-1; and first reading of Ordinance No. MC-1522 levying special taxes to be collected during FY 2019-20 to pay annual costs of maintenance, services and expenses with respect to Community Facilities District No. 2019-1. August 7, 2019 Final reading of Ordinance No. MC-1522 levying special taxes to be collected during FY 2019-20 to pay annual costs of maintenance, services and expenses with respect to Community Facilities District No. 2019-1.        Packet Page. 206 Resolution No. 2024-216 Resolution No. 2024-216 November 6, 2024 Page 1 of 4 5 5 9 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-216 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ANNEX TERRITORY INTO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, ADOPTING A MAP OF THE AREA TO BE PROPOSED (ANNEXATION NO. 47) AND AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAXES THEREIN WHEREAS, pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”), on June 5, 2019, the Mayor and City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of San Bernardino (the “City”) approved Resolution No. 2019-081 establishing Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California, defined the "CFD No. 2019-1", for the purpose of levying special taxes on parcels of taxable property therein for the purpose of providing certain services which are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council has received a written instrument from the landowner in the CFD No. 2019-1 to initiate and conduct proceedings pursuant to the Act, to annex territory to CFD No. 2019-1 and consenting to the shortening of election time requirements, waiving analysis and arguments, and waiving all notice and word limit requirements for the ballot relating to the conduct of the election; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council has been advised that certain property owners have requested that the area shown in Exhibit D be annexed territory to the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1, that a rate and method of apportionment of the special tax to be levied therein be established. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Intent to Annex. The Mayor and City Council hereby declares that it proposes and intends to conduct proceedings pursuant to Article 3.5 for the annexation to the Community Facilities District of the territory described in Exhibit A attached hereto. The Mayor and City Council determines that the public convenience and necessity require that such territory be annexed to the Community Facilities District. SECTION 2.Name of the Community Facilities District. The name of the existing community facilities district is known as “Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services)”. SECTION 3.Description of Territory Proposed to be Annexed, Annexation Map. The territory proposed to be annexed are included within the boundaries within which property may annex to CFD No. 2019-1 and are more particularly described and shown on that certain map        Packet Page. 207 Resolution No. 2024-216 Resolution No. 2024-216 November 6, 2024 Page 2 of 4 5 5 9 1 entitled “Boundaries – Potential Annexation Area Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) of the City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California,” as recorded on June 6, 2019 in Book 88 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities District, Page 33, and as Instrument No. 2019-0185395 in the official records of the County of San Bernardino. The territory proposed to be annexed to the CFD No. 2019-1 is described in Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. Such territory is also shown and described on the map thereof entitled "Annexation Map No. 47, Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services), City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California," which is on file with the City Clerk (the "Annexation Map") and attached hereto as Exhibit D. SECTION 4.Description of Authorized Services. The services proposed to be financed by CFD No. 2019-1 (the “Services”) are described in Exhibit B attached hereto. The cost of providing the Services includes “incidental expenses,” which include costs associated of CFD No. 2019-1, determination of the amount of special taxes, collection or payment of special taxes, or costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of CFD No. 2019-1. The Services authorized to be financed by CFD No. 2019-1 are in addition to those currently provided in the territory of CFD No. 2019-1 and do not supplant services already available within that territory. SECTION 5. Levy of Special Taxes. Except where funds are otherwise available, a special tax sufficient to pay the costs of the Services (including incidental expenses), secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all nonexempt real property in CFD No. 2019-1, will be levied annually within CFD No. 2019-1. The Rate and Method of Apportionment, and manner of collection of the special tax are specified in Exhibit C. SECTION 6. Adoption of Annexation Map. Pursuant to Section 3110.5 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Mayor and City Council adopts the Annexation Map as the map of the area proposed to be annexed to the CFD No. 2019-1. Pursuant to Section 3111 of said Code, the City Clerk shall file the original of the Annexation map in his office and shall file a copy of the Annexation Map with the County Recorder of the County of San Bernardino no later than 15 days prior to the date of the hearing specified in Section 7 hereof. SECTION 7. Public Hearing. The Mayor and City Council hereby fixes 5:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as practicable, on Wednesday, December 18, 2024, at the Bing Wong Auditorium of the Norman F. Feldheym Public Library at 555 W. 6th Street, San Bernardino, California, 92410, as the time and place when and where the Mayor and City Council will conduct a public hearing on the proposed annexation of the said territory to the CFD No. 2019-1. SECTION 8. Notice of Public Hearing. The City Clerk is hereby directed to publish, or cause to be published, a notice of said public hearing, in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit F, one time in a newspaper of general circulation published in the area of CFD No. 2019- 1. The publication of said notice shall be completed at least seven days prior to the date herein fixed for said hearing. Said notice shall contain the information prescribed by Section 53322 of the Act.        Packet Page. 208 Resolution No. 2024-216 Resolution No. 2024-216 November 6, 2024 Page 3 of 4 5 5 9 1 SECTION 9. Mailing Ballots. In anticipation of its action on Wednesday December 18, 2024 to call the election on the annexation for the same date, pursuant to waiver of election time limits from the landowners, the Mayor and City Council hereby authorizes the City Clerk to mail to each landowner in the territory proposed to be annexed to the CFD No. 2019-1 a ballot, the full text of which shall be as set forth in Exhibit G hereto and shall be included in the ballot pamphlet mailed to each qualified elector. A copy of the waiver and consent form signed by the property owner is attached hereto as Exhibit E and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 10. That the Mayor and City Council finds this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that the activity is covered by the general rule 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, as in this case, 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. SECTION 11. Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable. SECTION 12. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately. APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 6th day of November 2024. Helen Tran, Mayor City of San Bernardino Attest: Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk Approved as to form: Sonia Carvalho, City Attorney        Packet Page. 209 Resolution No. 2024-216 Resolution No. 2024-216 November 6, 2024 Page 4 of 4 5 5 9 1 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) I, Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2024-216, adopted at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of November 2024 by the following vote: Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT SANCHEZ _____ _____ _______ _______ IBARRA _____ _____ _______ _______ FIGUEROA _____ _____ _______ _______ SHORETT _____ _____ _______ _______ REYNOSO _____ _____ _______ _______ CALVIN _____ _____ _______ _______ ALEXANDER _____ _____ _______ _______ WITNESS my hand and official seal of the City of San Bernardino this ____ day of ____________ 2024. Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk        Packet Page. 210 EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED TERRITORY TO BE ANNEXED The City of San Bernardino Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) (the “CFD No. 2019-1”) Annexation No. 47 is currently comprised of two (2) parcels, located within the City boundaries. The property is identified by the following San Bernardino County Assessor's Parcel Number (APNs). APNs Owner Name 0281-361-23 CVP Hospitality CA, LLC 0281-361-22 CVP Hospitality CA, LLC        Packet Page. 211 EXHIBIT B DESCRIPTION OF AUTHORIZED SERVICES The services which may be funded with proceeds of the special tax of CFD No. 2019-1, as provided by Section 53313 of the Act, will include all costs attributable to maintaining, servicing, cleaning, repairing and/or replacing landscaped areas (may include reserves for replacement) in public street right-of-ways, public landscaping, public open spaces and other similar landscaped areas officially dedicated for public use. These services including the following: (a) maintenance and lighting of parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space, which maintenance and lighting services may include, without limitation, furnishing of electrical power to street lights and traffic signals; repair and replacement of damaged or inoperative light bulbs, fixtures and standards; maintenance (including irrigation and replacement) of landscaping vegetation situated on or adjacent to parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space; maintenance and repair of irrigation facilities; maintenance of public signage; graffiti removal from and maintenance and repair of public structures situated on parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space; maintenance and repair of playground or recreation program equipment or facilities situated on any park; and (b) maintenance and operation of water quality improvements which include storm drainage and flood protection facilities, including, without limitation, drainage inlets, catch basin inserts, infiltration basins, flood control channels, fossil fuel filters, and similar facilities. Maintenance services may include but is not limited to the repair, removal or replacement of all or part of any of the water quality improvements, fossil fuel filters within the public right-of-way including the removal of petroleum hydrocarbons and other pollutants from water runoff, or appurtenant facilities, clearing of inlets and outlets; erosion repairs; and cleanup to improvements, and other items necessary for the maintenance, servicing; or both of the water quality basin improvements within flood control channel improvements; and (c) public street sweeping, on the segments of the arterials within the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1; as well as local roads within residential subdivisions located within CFD No. 2019-1; and any portions adjacent to the properties within CFD No. 2019-1. In addition to payment of the cost and expense of the forgoing services, proceeds of the special tax may be expended to pay “Administrative Expenses,” as said term is defined in Exhibit B to this resolution of intention. The above services shall be limited to those provided within the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1 or for the benefit of the properties within the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1, as the boundary is expanded from time to time by anticipated annexations, and said services may be financed by proceeds of the special tax of CFD No. 2019-1 only to the extent that they are in addition to those provided in the territory of CFD No. 2019-1 before CFD No. 2019-1 was created.        Packet Page. 212 EXHIBIT C City of San Bernardino 1 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO A Special Tax (the “Special Tax”) shall be levied on and collected from each Assessor’s Parcel (defined below) in Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) (the “CFD No. 2019-1” or “CFD”; defined below), in each Fiscal Year, (defined below), commencing in the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2019, in an amount determined by the City Council of the City of San Bernardino, acting in its capacity as the legislative body of CFD No. 2019-1, by applying the rate and method of apportionment set forth below. All of the real property in CFD No. 2019-1, unless exempted by law or by the provisions herein, shall be taxed to the extent and in the manner provided herein. A. DEFINITIONS “Acre” or “Acreage” means the land area of an Assessor’s Parcel as shown on any Assessor’s Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on the Assessor’s Parcel Map, the land area as shown on the applicable Final Map, or if the area is not shown on the applicable Final Map, the land area shall be calculated by the Administrator. “Administrative Expenses” means the actual or reasonably estimated costs directly related to the formation, annexation, and administration of CFD No. 2019-1 including, but not limited to: the costs of computing the Special Taxes and preparing the annual Special Tax collection schedules (whether by the City or designee thereof or both); the costs to the City, CFD No. 2019-1, or any designee thereof associated with fulfilling the CFD No. 2019-1 disclosure requirements; the costs associated with responding to public inquiries regarding the Special Taxes; the costs of the City, CFD No. 2019-1 or any designee thereof related to an appeal of the Special Tax; and the City's annual administration fees including payment of a proportional share of salaries and benefits of any City employees and City overhead whose duties are related to the administration and third party expenses. Administrative Expenses shall also include amounts estimated or advanced by the City or CFD No. 2019-1 for any other administrative purposes of CFD No. 2019-1, including attorney's fees and other costs related to commencing and pursuing to completion any foreclosure of delinquent Special Taxes. “Administrator” means the City Manager of the City of San Bernardino, or his or her designee. “Approved Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property that are included in a Final Map that was recorded prior to the March 1 preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied, and that have not been issued a building permit on or prior to the June 1 preceding the Fiscal year in which the special tax is being levied. “Assessor’s Parcel” means a lot or parcel of land that is identifiable by an Assessor’s Parcel Number by the County Assessor of the County of San Bernardino. “Assessor’s Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels by Assessor’s Parcel Number. “Assessor’s Parcel Number” means that identification number assigned to a parcel by the County Assessor of the County.        Packet Page. 213 City of San Bernardino 2 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) “Building Square Footage” or “BSF” means the floor area square footage reflected on the original construction building permit issued for construction of a building of Non-Residential Property and any Building Square Footage subsequently added to a building of such Taxable Property after issuance of a building permit for expansion or renovation of such building. “Calendar Year” means the period commencing January 1 of any year and ending the following December 31. “CFD” or “CFD No. 2019-1” means the City of San Bernardino Community Facilities District No. 2019- 1 (Maintenance Services). “City” means the City of San Bernardino. “Contingent Special Tax B Requirement” means that amount required in any Fiscal Year, if the POA is unable to maintain the Service(s) to: (i) pay the costs of Services incurred or otherwise payable in the Calendar Year commencing in such Fiscal Year; (ii) fund an operating reserve for the costs of Services as determined by the Administrator; less a credit for funds available to reduce the annual Special Tax B (Contingent) levy as determined by the Administrator. “County” means the County of San Bernardino. “Developed Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property for which a building permit for new construction has been issued on or prior to June 1 preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied. “Exempt Property” means all Assessors’ Parcels designated as being exempt from the Special Tax as provided for in Section G. “Final Map” means a subdivision of property by recordation of a final map, parcel map, or lot line adjustment, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.) or recordation of a condominium plan pursuant to California Civil Code 1352 that creates individual lots for which building permits may be issued without further subdivision. “Fiscal Year” means the period from and including July 1st of any year to and including the following June 30th. “Land Use Category” or “LUC” means any of the categories contained in Section B hereof to which an Assessor’s Parcel is assigned consistent with the land use approvals that have been received or proposed for the Assessor’s Parcel as of June 1 preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied. “Maximum Special Tax” means either Maximum Special Tax A and/or Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent), as applicable. “Maximum Special Tax A” means the Maximum Special Tax A, as determined in accordance with Section C below that can be levied in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property within CFD No. 2019-1.        Packet Page. 214 City of San Bernardino 3 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) “Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent)” means the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent), as determined in accordance with Section C below that can be levied in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property within CFD No. 2019-1. “Multi-Family Residential Property” means any Assessor’s Parcel of residential property that consists of a building or buildings comprised of attached Residential Units sharing at least one common wall with another unit. “Non-Residential Property” or “NR” means all Assessor's Parcels of Taxable Property for which a building permit(s) was issued for a non-residential use. The Administrator shall make the determination if an Assessor’s Parcel is Non-Residential Property. “Property Owner’s Association” or “POA” means the property owner’s association or homeowner’s association established to maintain certain landscaping within a Tax Zone. “Proportionately” means for Taxable Property that is: (i) Developed Property, that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy to the Maximum Special Tax is the same for all Parcels of Developed Property with the same Tax Zone, (ii) Approved Property, that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy to the Maximum Special Tax is the same for all Parcels of Approved Property with the same Tax Zone, and (iii) Undeveloped Property that the ratio of the actual Special Tax levy per acre to the Maximum Special Tax per acre is the same for all Parcels of Undeveloped Property with the same Tax Zone. “Residential Unit” or "RU" means a residential unit that is used or intended to be used as a domicile by one or more persons, as determined by the Administrator. “Residential Property” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property upon which completed Residential Units have been constructed or for which building permits have been or may be issued for purposes of constructing one or more Residential Units. “Service(s)” means services permitted under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 including, without limitation, those services authorized to be funded by CFD No. 2019-1 as set forth in the documents adopted by the City Council at the time the CFD was formed. “Single Family Residential Property” means any residential property other than Multi-Family Residential Property on an Assessor’s Parcel. “Special Tax(es)” means the Special Tax A and/or Special Tax B (Contingent) to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property. “Special Tax A” means the annual special tax to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property to fund the Special Tax A Requirement. "Special Tax A Requirement" means for each Tax Zone, that amount to be collected in any Fiscal Year to pay for certain costs as required to meet the needs for such Tax Zone of CFD No. 2019-1 in both the current Fiscal Year and the next Fiscal Year. The costs to be covered shall be the direct costs for maintenance services including but not limited to (i) maintenance and lighting of parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space, (ii) maintenance and operation of water quality improvements, (iii) public street sweeping, (iv) fund an operating reserve for the costs of Services as determined by the Administrator, and (v) Administrative Expenses. Under no circumstances shall the Special Tax A Requirement include funds for Bonds.        Packet Page. 215 City of San Bernardino 4 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) “Special Tax B (Contingent)” means the Special Tax B (Contingent) to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property to fund the Contingent Special Tax B Requirement, if required. "Taxable Property" means all Assessor’s Parcels within CFD No. 2019-1, which are not Exempt Property. “Taxable Unit” means a Residential Unit, Building Square Footage, or an Acre. "Tax Zone" means a mutually exclusive geographic area, within which particular Special Tax rates may be levied pursuant to this Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax. Appendix C identifies the Tax Zone in CFD No. 2019-1 at formation; additional Tax Zones may be created when property is annexed into the CFD. "Tax Zone 1" means the specific geographic area identified on the CFD Boundary Map as Tax Zone 1. "Tract(s)" means an area of land; i) within a subdivision identified by a particular tract number on a Final Map, ii) identified within a Parcel Map; or iii) identified within lot line adjustment approved for subdivision. “Undeveloped Property” means, for each Fiscal Year, all Taxable Property not classified as Developed Property or Approved Property. B. ASSIGNMENT TO LAND USE CATEGORIES For each Fiscal Year, all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property within CFD No. 2019-1 shall be classified as Developed Property, Approved Property, or Undeveloped Property, and shall be subject to the levy of Special Taxes as determined pursuant to Sections C and D below. Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property and Approved Property shall be classified as either Residential Property or Non-Residential Property. Residential Property shall be further classified as Single Family Residential Property or Multi-Family Residential Property and the number of Residential Units shall be determined by the Administrator. C. MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATES For purposes of determining the applicable Maximum Special Tax for Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property and Approved Property which are classified as Residential Property, all such Assessor’s Parcels shall be assigned the number of Residential Unit(s) constructed or to be constructed thereon as specified in or shown on the building permit(s) issued or Final Map as determined by the Administrator. For Parcels of undeveloped property zoned for development of single family attached or multi-family units, the number of Residential Units shall be determined by referencing the condominium plan, apartment plan, site plan or other development plan, or by assigning the maximum allowable units permitted based on the underlying zoning for the Parcel. Once a single family attached or multi-family building or buildings have been built on an Assessor's Parcel, the Administrator shall determine the actual number of Residential Units contained within the building or buildings, and the Special Tax A levied against the Parcel in the next Fiscal Year shall be calculated by multiplying the actual number of Residential Units by the Maximum Special Tax per Residential Unit identified for the Tract below or as included in Appendix A as each Annexation occurs. For purposes of determining the applicable Maximum Special Tax for Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property and Approved Property which are classified as Non-Residential Property, all such Assessor’s        Packet Page. 216 City of San Bernardino 5 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) Parcels shall be assigned the number of Building Square Footage or Acres as shown on the Final Map as determined by the Administrator. Once the Administrator determines the actual number of Building Square Footage or Acres for the Assessor’s Parcels, the Special Tax A levied against the Assessor’s Parcel in the next Fiscal Year shall be calculated by multiplying the number of Building Square Footage or Acres by the Maximum Special Tax per Taxable Unit identified for the Tax Zone below or as included in Appendix A as each Annexation occurs. 1. Special Tax A a. Developed Property (i) Maximum Special Tax A The Maximum Special Tax A for each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property shall be specific to each Tax Zone within the CFD. When additional property is annexed into CFD No. 2019-1, the rate and method adopted for the annexed property shall reflect the Maximum Special Tax A for the Tax Zones annexed and included in Appendix A. The Maximum Special Tax A for Developed Property for Fiscal Year 2019-2020 within Tax Zone 1 is identified in Table 1 below: TABLE 1 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX A RATES DEVELOPED PROPERTY Tax Zone Tract Land Use Category Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax A 1 TR 17170 Single Family Residential Property RU $961 (ii) Increase in the Maximum Special Tax A On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax A for Developed Property shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater. (iii) Multiple Land Use Categories In some instances an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property may contain more than one Land Use Category. The Maximum Special Tax A that can be levied on an Assessor's Parcel shall be the sum of the Maximum Special Tax A that can be levied for each Land Use Category located on that Assessor's Parcel. For an Assessor's Parcel that contains more than one land use, the Acreage of such Assessor's Parcel shall be allocated to each type of property based on the amount of Acreage designated for each land use as determined by reference to the site plan approved for such Assessor's Parcel. The Administrator's allocation to each type of property shall be final. b. Approved Property The Maximum Special Tax A for each Assessor’s Parcel of Approved Property shall be specific to each Tax Zone within the CFD. When additional property is annexed into CFD No. 2019-1, the rate and method adopted for the annexed property shall reflect the Maximum Special Tax A for the Tax Zone annexed and included in Appendix A. The Maximum Special Tax A for Approved property Fiscal Year 2019-20 within Tax Zone 1 is identified in Table 2 below:        Packet Page. 217 City of San Bernardino 6 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) TABLE 2 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX A RATES APPROVED PROPERTY Tax Zone Tract Land Use Category Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax A 1 TR 17170 Single Family Residential RU $961 On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax A for Approved Property shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater. c. Undeveloped Property The Maximum Special Tax A for each Assessor’s Parcel of Undeveloped Property shall be specific to each Tax Zone within the CFD. When additional property is annexed into CFD No. 2019-1, the rate and method adopted for the annexed property shall reflect the Maximum Special Tax A for the Tax Zone annexed and included in Appendix A. The Maximum Special Tax A for Undeveloped Property for Fiscal Year 2019-20 within Tax Zone 1 is identified in Table 3 below: TABLE 3 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX A RATES UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY Tax Zone Tracts Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax A 1 TR 17170 Acre $4,338 On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax A for Undeveloped Property shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater. 2. Special Tax B (Contingent) The City Council shall levy Special Tax B (Contingent) only in the event the POA defaults in its obligation to maintain the Contingent Services, which default shall be deemed to have occurred, as determined by the Administrator, in each of the following circumstances: (a) The POA files for bankruptcy; (b) The POA is dissolved; (c) The POA ceases to levy annual assessments for the Contingent Services; or (d) The POA fails to provide the Contingent Services at the same level as the City provides similar services and maintains similar improvements throughout the City and within ninety (90) days after written notice from the City, or such longer period permitted by the City Manager, fails to remedy the deficiency to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Council. a. Developed Property (i) Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent)        Packet Page. 218 City of San Bernardino 7 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property is shown in Table 4 and shall be specific to each Tax Zone within the CFD. When additional property is annexed into CFD No. 2019-1, the rate and method adopted for the annexed property shall reflect the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for each Tax Zones annexed and included in Appendix A. The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Fiscal Year 2019-20 within Tax Zone 1 is identified in Table 4 below: TABLE 4 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX B (CONTINGENT) RATES DEVELOPED PROPERTY Tax Zone Tract Land Use Category Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) 1 TR 17170 Single Family Residential Property RU $0 (ii) Increase in the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Developed Property shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater. (iii) Multiple Land Use Categories In some instances an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property may contain more than one Land Use Category. The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) that can be levied on an Assessor's Parcel shall be the sum of the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) that can be levied for each Land Use Category located on that Assessor's Parcel. For an Assessor's Parcel that contains more than one land use, the Acreage of such Assessor's Parcel shall be allocated to each type of property based on the amount of Acreage designated for each land use as determined by reference to the site plan approved for such Assessor's Parcel. The Administrator's allocation to each type of property shall be final. b. Approved Property The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property is shown in Table 5 and shall be specific to each Tax Zone within the CFD. When additional property is annexed into CFD No. 2019-1, the rate and method adopted for the annexed property shall reflect the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for the Tax Zone annexed and included in Appendix A. The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Fiscal Year 2019-20 within the Tax Zone is identified in Table 5 below: TABLE 5 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX B (CONTINGENT) RATES APPROVED PROPERTY Tax Zone Tract Land Use Category Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) 1 TR 17170 Single Family Residential Property RU $0 On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Approved Property shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for        Packet Page. 219 City of San Bernardino 8 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater. c. Undeveloped Property The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property is shown in Table 6 and shall be specific to each Tax Zone within the CFD. When additional property is annexed into CFD No. 2019-1, the rate and method adopted for the annexed property shall reflect the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for the Tax Zone annexed and included in Appendix A. The Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Fiscal Year 2019-20 within the Tax Zone is identified in Table 6 below: TABLE 6 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX B (CONTINGENT) RATES UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY Tax Zone Tracts Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) 1 TR 17170 Acre $0 On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Undeveloped Property shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater. D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX 1. Special Tax A Commencing with Fiscal Year 2019-20 and for each following Fiscal Year, the Council shall determine the Special Tax A Requirement and shall levy the Special Tax A on all Assessor’s Parcels of Taxable Property until the aggregate amount of Special Tax A equals the Special Tax A Requirement for each Tax Zone. The Special Tax A shall be levied for each Fiscal Year as follows: First: The Special Tax A shall be levied Proportionately on all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property within each Tax Zone up to 100% of the applicable Maximum Special Tax to satisfy the Special Tax A Requirement for such Tax Zone; Second: If additional moneys are needed to satisfy the Special Tax A Requirement for a Tax Zone after the first step has been completed, the Special Tax A shall be levied Proportionately on each Parcel of Approved Property within such Tax Zone up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax A for Approved Property; Third: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Special Tax A Requirement for a Tax Zone after the first two steps has been completed, the Special Tax A shall be levied Proportionately on all Assessor’s Parcels of Undeveloped Property within such Tax Zone up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax A for Undeveloped Property. 2. Special Tax B (Contingent) Commencing with Fiscal Year in which Special Tax B (Contingent) is authorized to be levied and for each following Fiscal Year, the City Council shall determine the Contingent Special Tax B (Contingent) Requirement for each Tax Zone, if any, and shall levy the Special Tax on all Assessor’s Parcels of        Packet Page. 220 City of San Bernardino 9 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) Taxable Property within such Tax Zone until the aggregate amount of Special Tax B (Contingent) equals the Special Tax B ( Contingent) Requirement for such Tax Zone. The Special Tax B (Contingent) Shall be levied for each Fiscal Year as follows: First: The Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for a Tax Zone up to 100% of the applicable Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) to satisfy the Contingent Special Tax B Requirement; Second: If additional moneys are needed to satisfy the Contingent Special Tax B Requirement after the first step has been completed, the Special Tax B (Contingent) shall be levied Proportionately on each Parcel of Approved Property within such Tax Zone up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Approved Property; Third: If additional monies are needed to satisfy the Contingent Special Tax B Requirement after the first two steps has been completed, the Special Tax B (Contingent) shall be levied Proportionately on all Assessor’s Parcels of Undeveloped Property within such Tax Zone up to 100% of the Maximum Special Tax B (Contingent) for Undeveloped Property. E. FUTURE ANNEXATIONS It is anticipated that additional properties will be annexed to CFD No. 2019-1 from time to time. As each annexation is proposed, an analysis will be prepared to determine the annual cost for providing Services. Based on this analysis, the property to be annexed, pursuant to California Government Code section 53339 et seq. will be assigned to the appropriate Maximum Special Tax rate for the Tax Zone when annexed and included in Appendix A. F. DURATION OF SPECIAL TAX For each Fiscal Year, the Special Tax A shall be levied as long as the Services are being provided. For each Fiscal Year, the Special Tax B (Contingent) shall be levied as long as the Contingent Services are being provided. G. EXEMPTIONS The City shall classify as Exempt Property within CFD No. 2019-1, any Assessor’s Parcels; (i) which are owned by, irrevocably offered for dedication, encumbered by or restricted in use by any public entity; (ii) with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the easement; (iii) which are privately owned but are encumbered by or restricted solely for public uses; or (iv) which is in use in the performance of a public function as determined by the Administrator. H. APPEALS Any property owner claiming that the amount or application of the Special Taxes are not correct may file a written notice of appeal with the City not later than twelve months after having paid the first installment of the Special Tax that is disputed. A representative(s) of CFD No. 2019-1 shall promptly review the appeal, and if necessary, meet with the property owner, consider written and oral evidence regarding the amount of the Special Tax, and rule on the appeal. If the representative’s decision requires that the Special Tax for an Assessor’s Parcel be modified or changed in favor of the property owner, a cash refund shall not be made, but an adjustment shall be made to the Special Tax on that Assessor’s Parcel in the subsequent Fiscal Year(s).        Packet Page. 221 City of San Bernardino 10 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) I. MANNER OF COLLECTION The Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes, provided, however, that CFD No. 2019-1 may collect the Special Tax at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet its financial obligations.        Packet Page. 222 City of San Bernardino 11 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) APPENDIX A CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) COST ESTIMATE Special Tax A Services - The estimate breaks down the costs of providing one year's maintenance services for Fiscal Year 2024-25. These services are being funded by the levy of Special Tax A for Community Facilities District No. 2019-1. TAX ZONE 47 PM 17772 Item Description Estimated Cost 1 Landscape $2,078 2 Lights $7,877 3 Streets $2,093 4 Reserves $1,807 5 Admin $1,455 Total $15,310 Special Tax B Contingent Services – There are no services being funded by the levy of Special Tax B (Contingent) for Community Facilities District No. 2019-1. However, additional Tax Zones may have Special Tax B Contingent Services being provided. TAX ZONE 47 FY 2024-25 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATES DEVELOPED PROPERTY AND APPROVED PROPERTY Land Use Category Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax A Maximum Special Tax B Non-Residential Property Acre $5,635 $0 TAX ZONE 47 FY 2024-25 MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATES UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax A Maximum Special Tax B Acre $5,635 $0        Packet Page. 223 City of San Bernardino 12 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) TAX ZONE SUMMARY Annexation Tax Zone Tract APN Fiscal Year Maximum Special Tax A Maximum Special Tax B Subdivider Original 1 17170 2019-20 $961 / RU $0 / RU Santiago Communities, Inc. 1 2 17329 2019-20 $473 / RU $0 / RU JEC Enterprises, Inc. 2 3 PM 19814 2020-21 $608 / Acre $0 / Acre GWS #4 Development, LLC 3 4 0266-041-39 2019-20 $1,136 / Acre $0 / Acre Devore Storage Facility, LLC 4 5 TR 20006 2020-21 $344 / RU $57 / RU TH Rancho Palma, LLC 5 6 PM 19701 2020-21 $1,895 / Acre $528 / Acre Strata Palma, LLC 6 7 PM 20112 2020-21 $3,197 / Acre $0 / Acre San Bernardino Medical Center LLC 7 8 TR 20293 2021-22 $2,913 / Acre $334 / Acre ICO Fund VI, LLC 8 9 LM 2019-021 2021-22 $815 / Acre $232 / Acre TR 2600 Cajon Industrial LLC 9 10 TR 20189 2021-22 $490 / Acre $154 / Acre Central Commerce Center, LLC 10 11 LD 1900086 2021-22 $1,472 / Acre $0 / Acre Lankershim Industrial, LLC 11 12 TR 20305 2022-23 $175 / Acre $0 / Acre Prologis, LP 12 13 LLA 2020-004 2022-23 $1,169 / Acre $0 / Acre Dreamland Real Estate Holdings 13 14 TR 5907 2022-23 $2,268 / Acre $0 / Acre Magic Laundry Services, Inc. 14 15 0136-191-21 2022-23 $5,277 / Acre $0 / Acre Ahmad Family Trust 15 16 TR 20216 2022-23 $7,089 / Acre $0 / Acre Gateway SB, LLC 16 17 TR 20145 2022-23 $646 / RU $0 / RU RCH-CWI Belmont, LP 17 18 CUP 20-07 2022-23 $7,433 / Acre $0 / Acre George A. Pearson 18 19 TR 20258 2022-23 $588 / RU $0 / RU RGC Family Trust 19 20 LM 21-10 2022-23 $5,284 / Acre $0 / Acre 170 East 40th Street, LLC 20 21 LM 22-04 2022-23 $6,397 / Acre $0 / Acre 108 Highland, LP 21 22 LM 2021-013 2022-23 $807 / Acre $0 / Acre SBABP IV, LLC 22 23 TR 4592 2022-23 $847 / Acre $320 / Acre 1300 E Highland Ave LLC 23 24 LLA 2020-005 2022-23 $1,385 / Acre $978 / Acre Vone SB, LLC 24 25 TR 20494 2022-23 $174 / RU $17 / RU PI Properties, LLC 25 26 TR 20495 2022-23 $204 / RU $45 / RU Pacific West Company, et al. 26 To Be Determined 27 28 PM 20320 2022-23 $1,851 / Acre $292 / Acre SB Drake Central Avenue LLC 28 29 TR 17329 2023-24 $595 / RU $0 / RU Verdemont Ranch 20, LLC 29 30 LL 2022-11 2022-23 $922 / Acre $372 / Acre CIVF VI – CA1W01, LLC 30 31 PM 20143 2022-23 $2,957 / Acre $1,855 / Acre California Cajun Properties LLC 31 32 PM 20334 2023-24 $358 / Acre $94 / Acre Elliott Precision Block Co. 32 33 PM 3613, 4230 & 4250 2022-23 $1,094 / Acre $186 / Acre S.B. Universal Self Storage LLC 33 34 PM 20392 2023-24 $2,785 / Acre $158 / Acre GWS#7 Development, LLC 34 35 CUP 21-16 2023-24 $533 / Acre $193 / Acre MLG SB Land LLC & Grandfather’s Land Holdings LLC 35 36 CUP 22-03 2023-24 $6,648 / Acre $0 / Acre SimonCRE JC Saguaro III, LLC 36 37 LM 2022-007 2023-24 $1,261 / Acre $0 / Acre DP Industrial Parkway LLC 37 38 TR 18895 2023-24 $706 / RU $0 / Acre MV RE Holdings LLC 38 39 LLA 2023-008 2023-24 $3,081 / Acre $0 / Acre In-N-Out Burgers, a California Corporation 39 40 LM 2022-19 2023-24 $473 / Acre $0 / Acre PME Oakmont Tippecanoe LP 40 41 LLA 2023-010 2023-24 $2,132 / Acre $0 / Acre Shandon Hills Plaza LLC 41 42 PM 20216 2023-24 $7,925 / Acre $0 / Acre Inland Maple Partners LLC        Packet Page. 224 City of San Bernardino 13 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) Annexation Tax Zone Tract APN Fiscal Year Maximum Special Tax A Maximum Special Tax B Subdivider 43 43 PM 20527 2023-24 $7,172 / Acre $0 / Acre Gateway SB LLC 44 44 PM 18704 2023-24 $1,672 / Acre $0 / Acre Paladin Equity SB LLC 45 45 PM 20412 2023-24 $1,826 / Acre $0 / Acre GWS #8 Development, LLC 46 46 To be determined 47 47 PM 17772 2024-25 $5,635 / Acre $0/Acre CVP Hospitality CA LLC 48 48 1199-671-13 2024-25 $247/RU $0/RU Piedmont Venture I, LLC 49 49 0141-252-08 2024-25 $1,751 / Acre $0/Acre City of Riverside ESCALATION OF MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAXES On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2020 the Maximum Special Tax shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County (1982-84 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater.        Packet Page. 225 City of San Bernardino 14 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) APPENDIX B CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) DESCRIPTION OF AUTHORIZED SERVICES The services which may be funded with proceeds of the special tax of CFD No. 2019-1, as provided by Section 53313 of the Act, will include all costs attributable to maintaining, servicing, cleaning, repairing and/or replacing landscaped areas (may include reserves for replacement) in public street right-of-ways, public landscaping, public open spaces and other similar landscaped areas officially dedicated for public use. These services including the following: (a) maintenance and lighting of parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space, which maintenance and lighting services may include, without limitation, furnishing of electrical power to street lights and traffic signals; repair and replacement of damaged or inoperative light bulbs, fixtures and standards; maintenance (including irrigation and replacement) of landscaping vegetation situated on or adjacent to parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space; maintenance and repair of irrigation facilities; maintenance of public signage; graffiti removal from and maintenance and repair of public structures situated on parks, parkways, streets, roads and open space; maintenance and repair of playground or recreation program equipment or facilities situated on any park; and (b) maintenance and operation of water quality improvements which include storm drainage and flood protection facilities, including, without limitation, drainage inlets, catch basin inserts, infiltration basins, flood control channels, fossil fuel filters, and similar facilities. Maintenance services may include but is not limited to the repair, removal or replacement of all or part of any of the water quality improvements, fossil fuel filters within the public right-of-way including the removal of petroleum hydrocarbons and other pollutants from water runoff, or appurtenant facilities, clearing of inlets and outlets; erosion repairs; and cleanup to improvements, and other items necessary for the maintenance, servicing; or both of the water quality basin improvements within flood control channel improvements; and (c) public street sweeping, on the segments of the arterials within the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1; as well as local roads within residential subdivisions located within CFD No. 2019-1; and any portions adjacent to the properties within CFD No. 2019-1; and In addition to payment of the cost and expense of the forgoing services, proceeds of the special tax may be expended to pay “Administrative Expenses,” as said term is defined in the Rate and Method of Apportionment. The above services shall be limited to those provided within the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1 or for the benefit of the properties within the boundaries of CFD No. 2019-1, as the boundary is expanded from time to time by anticipated annexations, and said services may be financed by proceeds of the special tax of CFD No. 2019-1 only to the extent that they are in addition to those provided in the territory of CFD No. 2019-1 before CFD No. 2019-1 was created.        Packet Page. 226 City of San Bernardino 15 Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) APPENDIX C CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) PROPOSED BOUNDARIES AND POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA BOUNDARIES        Packet Page. 227 EXHIBIT D        Packet Page. 228 EXHIBIT E        Packet Page. 229        Packet Page. 230        Packet Page. 231        Packet Page. 232        Packet Page. 233        Packet Page. 234        Packet Page. 235        Packet Page. 236        Packet Page. 237 EXHIBIT F NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON INTENTION TO ANNEX TERRITORY TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) (ANNEXATION NO. 47) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of San Bernardino on November 6, 2024 adopted its Resolution No. 2024-___, in which it declared its intention to annex territory to existing Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) (the "CFD No. 2019-1"), and to levy a special tax to pay for certain maintenance services, all pursuant to the provisions of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the California Government Code. The resolution describes the territory to be annexed and describes the rate and method of apportionment of the proposed special tax. No change in the tax levied in the existing CFD No. 2019-1 is proposed. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the City Council has fixed 5:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as practicable, Wednesday, December 18, 2024 at the Bing Wong Auditorium of the Norman F. Feldheym Public Library at 555 W. 6th Street, San Bernardino, California, as the time and place when and where the City Council will conduct a public hearing on the annexation of territory to CFD No. 2019-1. At the hearing, the testimony of all interest persons for or against the annexation of the territory or the levying of the special taxes will be heard. If and to the extent participation in the December 18, 2024 meeting must occur by teleconference, videoconference, or other electronic means authorized by the Ralph M. Brown Act or an Executive Order of the Governor of California, the means and methods for participating the meeting shall be posted on the Agenda for said meeting, which shall be posted at least 72 hours prior to the meeting on the City of San Bernardino (www.sbcity.org), and outside of the Bing Wong Auditorium of the Norman F. Feldheym Public Library at 555 W. 6th Street, San Bernardino, California, 92410. A copy of the Agenda will be made available upon request to the San Bernardino City Clerk's office at 909-384-5002. DATED: ____________, 2024 _________________________________________ City Clerk of the City of San Bernardino PUB: _______________, 2024        Packet Page. 238 EXHIBIT G CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) ANNEXATION NO. 47 (December 18, 2024) This ballot is for the use of the authorized representative of the following owner of land within Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) (“CFD No. 2019-1”) of the City of San Bernardino: Name of Landowner Number of Acres Owned Total Votes CVP Hospitality CA, LLC 2.71 3 According to the provisions of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, and resolutions of the City Council (the “Council”) of the City of San Bernardino (the “City”), the above-named landowner is entitled to cast the number of votes shown above under the heading “Total Votes,” representing the total votes for the property owned by said landowner. The City has sent the enclosed ballot to you so that you may vote on whether or not to approve the special tax. This special tax ballot is for the use of the property owner of the parcels identified below, which parcels are located within the territory proposed to form the CFD No. 2019-1, City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California. Please advise the City Clerk, at (909) 384-5002 if the name set forth below is incorrect or if you are no longer one of the owners of these parcels. This special tax ballot may be used to express either support for or opposition to the proposed special tax. To be counted, this special tax ballot must be signed below by the owner or, if the owner is not an individual, by an authorized representative of the owner. The ballot must then be delivered to the City Clerk, either by mail or in person, as follows: Mail Delivery: Personal Delivery: If by mail, place ballot in the return envelope provided, and mail no later than December 4, 2024, two calendar weeks prior to the date set for the election. Mailing later than this deadline creates the risk that the special tax ballot may not be received in time to be counted. If in person, deliver to the City Clerk at any time up to 5:00 p.m. on December 18, 2024, at the Clerk’s office at 201 N. “E” Street, Bldg A, City of San Bernardino, CA 92401. However delivered, this ballot must be received by the Clerk prior to the close of the public meeting on December 18, 2024. Very truly yours, Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk        Packet Page. 239 TO CAST THIS BALLOT, PLEASE RETURN THIS ENTIRE PAGE. OFFICIAL SPECIAL TAX BALLOT Name & Address of Property Owner: Assessor’s Parcel Number(s): CVP Hospitality CA, LLC Attn: John Bonsall 2188 SW Park Place, Suite 100 Portland, OR 97205 0281-361-23, 0281-361-22 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES) AN “X” OR OTHER MARK WILL CAST ALL VOTES ASSIGNED TO THIS BALLOT SPECIAL TAX BALLOT MEASURE MARK “YES” OR “NO” WITH AN “X”: Shall the City Council of the City of San Bernardino be authorized to levy a special tax on an annual basis at the rate set forth in the following table: Land Use Category Taxable Unit Maximum Special Tax A Non-Residential Property Acre $5,635 plus an annual increase on each July 1, commencing on July 1, 2025 the Maximum Special Tax shall increase by i) the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for Riverside - San Bernardino - Ontario (December 2017 = 100) since the beginning of the preceding Fiscal Year, or ii) by two percent (2.0%), whichever is greater, to finance certain services within the territory identified on the map entitled “Annexation Map No. 47 of Community Facilities District No. 2019-1 (Maintenance Services) City of San Bernardino” including landscaping, lighting, and streets as provided in the Rate and Method of Apportionment (including incidental expenses) which is attached as Exhibit C to Resolution No. 2024-__ adopted by the City Council of the City of San Bernardino on November 6, 2024, and shall an appropriation limit be established for the Community Facilities District No. 2019- 1 (Maintenance Services) in the amount of special taxes collected? YES _________ NO _________ Certification for Special Election Ballot The undersigned is an authorized representative of the above-named landowner and is the person legally authorized and entitled to cast this ballot on behalf of the above-named landowner. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration is executed on ____________, 20__. John Bonsall Manager Signature Print Name Title        Packet Page. 240 SCALE 1"=100' 215 10 CFD MAINTENANCE AREA HOSPITALITY LANE CFD MAINTENANCE& SITEPLAN EXHIBIT        Packet Page. 241 GOULD ST TIPPECANOE AVEHOSPITALITYLNH ARRIMANP L CARNEGIE DR CO ULSTON ST CONEJO DR^_ MIL L ST SPRUCE ST SIERRA WAY2ND ST ORANGE SHOW RD 4TH ST CENTRAL AVE NORMA N R D PENNSYLVANIA AVEWATERMAN AVEACADEMY STMT.VIEW AVECOLTON AVEREDLANDS BLVD MIL L ST §¨¦10 CFD NO. 2019-1 (MAINTENANCE SERVICES)ANNEXATION NO. 47 PROJECT MAP        Packet Page. 242 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Rochelle Clayton, Acting City Manager Jeannie Fortune, Interim Director of Finance & Management Services Department:Finance & Management Services Subject:Review of Administrative Budget Transfers From April 1, 2024 Through June 30, 2024 (All Wards) Recommendation It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, review and file all listed administrative budget transfers from April 1, 2024 through June 30, 2024. Executive Summary Finance & Management Services requests the Mayor and City Council to review and file department to department, administrative budget transfers made from April 1st to June 30, 2024. Background On May 4, 2022, the Mayor and City Council adopted Ordinance No. MC-1568 which amended Section 3.05.010 in the Municipal Code regarding budget transfers. Specifically, the amendment to the ordinance nullified the not-to-exceed amount of $25,000 per budget transfer; authorized the Director of Finance & Management Services to approve budget transfers within a department’s personnel budget into their operating budget; authorized the Director of Finance & Management Services to approve department to department budget transfers; established that budget transfers will not increase or decrease a department’s approved budget, nor will it increase or decrease the approved fund budget without council approval; and stated that any cumulative amount of more than $5,000 transferred between departments in a 12- month period must be reported to the Mayor and City Council during the regular Quarterly Report.        Packet Page. 243 Discussion Budget transfers are requests received by Finance & Management Services from departments to move funds from one account to another after the adoption of the original budget. Transfers occur when a department needs to correct its originally adopted budget or to move funds to accommodate a change in a department’s planned expenditures. When processing budget transfers, Finance & Management Services verifies that the transfer properly allocates resources based on the strategic objectives and goals set forth by the Mayor and City Council and reflects the priorities of the community. The table below provides the list of the administrative transfers that have been processed. Date of Transfer From To Amount 5/8/2024 City Manager Information Technology $30,802.29 5/21/2024 Community Development & Housing Parks, Recreation & Community Services $137,000.00 5/21/2024 Community Development & Housing Information Technology $100,000.00 6/30/2024 Public Works General Government $41,047.44 6/30/2024 General Government Finance & Management Services $21,347.61 6/30/2024 General Government Human Resources & Risk Management $18,086.08 6/30/2024 General Government Human Resources & Risk Management $22,465.17 6/30/2024 General Government Economic Development and Community Development & Housing $10,636.33 6/30/2024 Community Development & Housing Economic Development $551,300.00 6/30/2024 Community Development & Housing City Manager $292,534.16 The transfer from City Manager’s Office to Information Technology was to fund the cost of network hardware equipment needed to create additional office space in Vanir’s first floor. The transfer from Community Development & Housing to Parks, Recreation & Community Services was to support the Rudy Hernandez Gymnasium Floor project, Delmann Heights Upgrades, and lighting at Del Rosa, Encanto, and Nunez baseball fields.        Packet Page. 244 The transfer from Community Development & Housing to Information Technology was to fund the video server hardware needed for additional video storage in the City. The transfer from Public Works to General Government was to fund additional security costs associated with the Santa Fe Depot Aux for the months of May and June. The transfer from General Government to Finance & Management Services was to fund the Californians For All Youth Workforce Development Program Intern salaries and benefits. The transfers from General Government to Human Resources & Risk Management were to fund the Californians For All Youth Workforce Development Program Intern salaries and benefits. The transfers from General Government to Community Development & Housing and Economic Development were to fund the Californians For All Youth Workforce Development Program Intern salaries and benefits. The transfer from Community Development & Housing to Economic Development was to transfer the Small Business and Non-Profit Assistance Grant Program. The transfer from Community Development & Housing to City Manager’s Office was to fund year-end personnel expense deficits. 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals Authorization of this file and receive item aligns with three of the adopted 2021-2025 Key Strategic Targets and Goals. Finance & Management Services reporting on departmental administrative budget transfers completed within the quarter that meet the requirements of the Mayor and City Council helps Improved Operational & Financial Capacity by effectively creating a framework for spending decisions. Administering budget transfers meets the Focused, Aligned Leadership and Unified Community goal by developing and implementing a community engagement plan where the community and staff actively adapt to ensure needs of the community are fulfilled. Improved Quality of Life is met by ensuring that service levels are funded proactively to integrate customer-service orientation and metrics into all City operations. Fiscal Impact There is no General Fund impact to the City. Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, review and file all listed administrative budget transfers from April 1, 2024 through June 30, 2024.        Packet Page. 245 Attachments Attachment 1 Ordinance MC-1568 Ward All Wards Synopsis of Previous Council Actions December 1, 2021 Mayor and City Council heard the FY 2021/22 1st Quarter Report; Adopted Resolution No. 2021-289 amending the City of San Bernardino’s FY 2021/22 Operating Budget; and introduced, read by title only, and waived further reading of Ordinance No. MC-1568, amending section 3.05 of the Municipal Code pertaining to budget transfers. May 4, 2022 Mayor and City Council adopted Ordinance No. MC-1568, amending section 3.05 on the Municipal Code.        Packet Page. 246        Packet Page. 247        Packet Page. 248        Packet Page. 249        Packet Page. 250        Packet Page. 251 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Rochelle Clayton, City Manager; C. Jeannie Fortune, Interim Director of Finance & Management Services Department:Finance & Management Services Subject:Review of Administrative Budget Transfers from July 1, 2024 through September 30, 2024 (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, review and file all listed administrative budget transfers from July 1, 2024, through September 30, 2024. Executive Summary Finance & Management Services requests the Mayor and City Council to review and file department to department, administrative budget transfers made from July 1st to September 30th, 2024. Background On May 4, 2022, the Mayor and City Council adopted Ordinance No. MC-1568 which amended Section 3.05.010 in the Municipal Code regarding budget transfers. Specifically, the amendment to the ordinance nullified the not-to-exceed amount of $25,000 per budget transfer; authorized the Director of Finance & Management Services to approve budget transfers within a department’s personnel budget into their operating budget; authorized the Director of Finance & Management Services to approve department to department budget transfers; established that budget transfers will not increase or decrease a department’s approved budget, nor will it increase or decrease the approved fund budget without council approval; and stated that any cumulative amount of more than $5,000 transferred between departments in a 12- month period must be reported to the Mayor and City Council during the regular Quarterly Report.        Packet Page. 252 Discussion Budget transfers are requests received by Finance & Management Services from departments to move funds from one account to another, after the adoption of the original budget. Transfers occur when a department needs to correct its originally adopted budget or move funds to accommodate a change in the department’s planned expenditures. When processing budget transfers, Finance & Management Services verifies that the transfer properly allocates resources based on the strategic objectives and goals set forth by the Mayor and City Council and reflects the priorities of the community. The table below provides the list of the administrative transfers that have been processed. The transfer from Public Works to the Police Department was to fund the Citywide Security Contracts that were originally budgeted under Public Works. Under direction from the previous City Manager, the Police Department has been tasked with managing the Citywide Security services and their associated budget. The transfer from Community Development & Housing to Economic Development was to transfer Economic Development’s budget that remained within Community Development & Housing. The transfer from Public Works to General Government was to fund the City’s 50% share of the Santa Fe Depot Aux Fiscal Year 2024/25 expenses. 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals Authorization of this file and receive item aligns with three of the adopted 2021-2025 Key Strategic Targets and Goals. Finance & Management Services reporting on departmental administrative budget transfers completed within the quarter that meet the requirements of the Mayor and City Council helps Improved Operational & Financial Capacity by effectively creating a framework for spending decisions. Administering budget transfers meets the Focused, Aligned Leadership and Unified Community goal by developing and implementing a community engagement plan where the community and staff actively adapt to ensure needs of the community are fulfilled. Improved Quality of Life is met by ensuring that service levels are funded proactively to integrate customer-service orientation and metrics into all City operations.        Packet Page. 253 Fiscal Impact There is no General Fund impact to the City. Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, review and file all listed administrative budget transfers from July 1, 2024 through September 30, 2024. Attachments Attachment 1 - Ordinance MC-1568: Budget Transfers Ward: All Wards Synopsis of Previous Council Actions: On December 1, 2021 Mayor and City Council heard the FY 2021/22 1st Quarter Report; Adopted Resolution No. 2021-289 amending the City of San Bernardino’s FY 2021/22 Operating Budget; and introduced, read by title only, and waived further reading of Ordinance No. MC-1568, amending section 3.05 of the Municipal Code pertaining to budget transfers. On May 4, 2022 Mayor and City Council adopted Ordinance No. MC-1568, amending section 3.05 on the Municipal Code.        Packet Page. 254        Packet Page. 255        Packet Page. 256        Packet Page. 257        Packet Page. 258        Packet Page. 259 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Rochelle Clayton, Acting City Manager; Rolland Kornblau, Director of Information Technology Department:Information Technology Subject:Request for Approval to Renew Trend Micro Vision One Subscription and add Tipping Point a Threat Protection System (TPS). Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California approve the renewal of the Trend Micro Vision One Subscription and the addition of TippingPoint a Threat Protection System (TPS) to our cybersecurity measures for a 3-year term not to exceed $584,681.14. Executive Summary Subscription to Tipping Point Threat Protection System(TPS) will enhance our current license with Trend by adding hardware that monitors the network in real time. Monitoring for threats in real time will mitigate infections from happening on the network before becoming an issue on the computers. This renewal and addition are crucial for maintaining and enhancing our cybersecurity. Trend Micro has been a trusted provider of cybersecurity solutions for the city, offering protection against various cyber threats. Background Trend Micro has been a reliable provider of cybersecurity solutions for the city over the past 25 years, safeguarding against a wide range of threats. As our digital landscape continues to evolve, it is crucial not only to renew our current subscription but also to integrate additional security measures to proactively protect the integrity of the city’s data. Discussion Renewing Trend Micro Vision One Subscription and adding TippingPoint, a Threat Protection System (TPS), to our security infrastructure is an essential step in safeguarding our organization’s digital environment. The current service includes        Packet Page. 260 endpoint protection, cloud, and email security. Renewing will offer continued, uninterrupted protection against malware, ransomware, and other cyber threats. TPS is obtained directly from the vendor of the existing end point protection. TippingPoint (TPS) provides an added layer of physical protection by inspecting and blocking all network traffic, both inbound and outbound, against unknown vulnerabilities. Combining Vision One’s threat intelligence from various sources and TippingPoint’s real-time threat analysis allows for earlier detection of cyber threats, leading to more efficient incident response times. The cost for renewing the Trend Micro Vision One Subscription for 3 years is $262,372.48. This subscription includes extended detection and response (XDR) capabilities, integrating data from endpoints and servers. It also offers centralized management and automated incident response to threats. TippingPoint’s 3-year subscription costs $322,308.66. It features prevention of network-based attacks, detailed inspection to identify patterns and block malicious activity, and provides up- to-date threat protection. Streamlining Trend Micro Vision Ones automated incident response capabilities with TippingPoint’s threat prevention ensures quick and efficient handling of security incidents. 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals This request is aligned with Key Target No. 1: Improve Operational & Financial Capacity. Approval of the renewal of the current cybersecurity and addition of TippingPoint enhances security operations, making it easier to monitor and respond to threats across the entire IT environment. Fiscal Impact Tipping Point total is $322,308.66 total - $99,900 the first year, $100,480.38 the second year and $121,928.28 the third year. Vision One total is $87,313.64 the first year, $87,529.42 the second year and $87,539.42 the third year. The fiscal impact for this item is $584,681.14. There is sufficient budget in the Department’s FY24/25 Operating Budget to fund this agreement. There is no additional impact to the General Fund. Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California approve the renewal of the Trend Micro Vision One Endpoint Subscription and the addition of Tipping Point a Threat Protection System (TPS) to our cybersecurity measures for a 3-year term not to exceed $584,681.14. Attachments Attachment 1 – Trend Renewal_Tipping Point Quote Attachment 2 – SBCity - Trend Solution Summary Ward: All Wards        Packet Page. 261 Synopsis of Previous Council Actions: N/A        Packet Page. 262        Packet Page. 263        Packet Page. 264        Packet Page. 265        Packet Page. 266        Packet Page. 267 City of San Bernadino –Solution Summary 2024 Budget Spend Cody Reagan Regional Account Executive        Packet Page. 268 Project Goals •Streamline security process with single platform approach (Vision One) •Prevent exposure to attack •Add layers of redundancy for wider visibility of threats •Shift process from reactive to proactive •Understand risks in a preventative way •Continue to integrate tools into Vision One Platform        Packet Page. 269 3 | ©2023 Trend Micro Inc. Vision One credits can be applied to any expansion of services or growth of current environment Currently they are being used to add XDR and ASRM to all endpoints Budget Summary        Packet Page. 270 4 | ©2023 Trend Micro Inc. 120 licenses for servers 1,050 licenses for user and city devices        Packet Page. 271 5 | ©2023 Trend Micro Inc. Vision One - Endpoint Security (Pro) Endpoint Security •Purpose-built security for endpoint, server, and cloud workloads •Single console for visibility and management; protection and EDR •Connected IT/SecOps workflow •Part of Vision One platform natively Public/Private Cloud Laptop Virtual Server ServerDesktop Value Toward Goals •Replacing Apex One in server environment (not designed for servers in mind) •Strengthening Vision One with robust server data and acting as a backup to Tipping Point internally        Packet Page. 272 6 | ©2023 Trend Micro Inc. Vision One - Endpoint Security (Core) Endpoint Security Public/Private Cloud Laptop Virtual Server ServerDesktop Value Toward Goals •Continued push into Vision One in all endpoints •Simplify visibility with native connection into platform •Will replace the on-premise Apex which was a target during attack        Packet Page. 273 7 | ©2023 Trend Micro Inc. Tipping Point – Threat Protection System (IPS) Pre-emptive threat prevention TippingPoint TPS, deployed inline, inspects and blocks all directions of traffic (inbound, outbound, and lateral) in real time, protecting your environment against known, unknown, and undisclosed vulnerabilities. Value Toward Goals •Adds layer of protection that is physical and in your environment (sits behind firewall) •Feeds essential data to Vision One when anything gets past edge security •Blocks malicious behaviors automatically •Virtual Patching to reduce overall risk exposure        Packet Page. 274 8 | ©2023 Trend Micro Inc. Service One Complete Value Toward Goals •Essential in the mitigation the recent attack •Incident response team was involved within hours •Round the clock monitoring at a fraction of the price of 24/7 staff or 3rd party SOC •Drives involvement of the city and Trend to be aware of all risks, alerts, and attacks together •Frees up time for proactive risk assessment and less time looking at alerts •Proactive Alerts and Threat Hunting •Detect and Respond Faster •Extend Your Team •Maximize Effectiveness & Skills •24/7/365 global support •Assigned Service Manager and priority case handling •Managed XDR using MITRE ATT&CK framework and proprietary threat hunting tools •Product and threat training for your team •Regular sync meetings and health checks •40 hours of IR Services (used in October to stop an active threat)        Packet Page. 275 9 | ©2023 Trend Micro Inc. Vision One – Network Monitoring •All network connected assets continuously tracked •Unsanctioned assets identified •Endpoint protection methodically and holistically deployed •Option to add sandboxing •Assets not fit for agent protection defended at the network layer •Provide actionable data to ASRM and XDR efforts in Vision One Value Toward Goals •Sees all network traffic and not just what has a Trend agent on •Used for deep understanding of environment and forensics (similar to how our IR team does research with DDI) •Strengthen view of the attack surface and risks associated •Deep analysis of traffic and behaviors •Virtual sensors highly adjustable and configurable to see anything missing or when the are infrastructure changes        Packet Page. 276 2 3 3 8 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Rochelle Clayton, Acting City Manager; Ed Erjavek, Library Director Department:Library Subject:Library Literacy Program Grant Funding (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-217, approving: 1. Accepting grant funding of $50,000 from the California Department of Education (CDE) and a “block grant” of $73,200 for Adult and Family Literacy Services from the California State Library’s California Library Literacy Services (CLLS) Program. 2. Authorizing the Interim Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2024/25 Operating Budget for the Literacy program including adjusting the CDE budget to account for any differences in the estimated grant funding versus the actual grant funding received and appropriating $73,200 of grant funding in both revenues and expenditures for the California Adult and Family Literacy Programs. Executive Summary The Library has a Literacy Program in the Jack L. Hill Lifelong Learning Center, at the Feldheym Central Library, that is mostly grant-funded and instructs learners to improve their literacy skills, which helps them improve their educational and employment opportunities. These grant funds do not have any match requirement and as a result, there is not any impact to the General Fund. Background The San Bernardino Public Library (SBPL) has a Literacy Department at the Feldheym Central Library, in the Jack L. Hill Lifelong Learning Center, that is mostly grant funded. The Literacy Department budget, adopted by the Mayor and City Council, is a        Packet Page. 277 2 3 3 8 projection as the actual amounts from the CDE and Adult and Family Literacy Services from CLLS is not known until the fall of each year. The Literacy Program applies for these grants on annual basis. The CDE funding is from the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), Title II: Adult Education and Family Literacy Act. The Literacy Program is a partner of the San Bernardino County Workforce Development Board. Literacy offers various services to help City residents improve their lives. Besides basic English and English as a Second Language (ESL) literacy services, Jack L. Hill Lifelong Learning Center also offers citizenship history and interview classes, and homework assistance for students in kindergarten through eighth grade for English and math at the Feldheym Central Library. The Library usually receives these annual grant awards in September and then the Library has to go to the Mayor and City Council to accept and amend the Library’s budget. Discussion The respective grant funds are used as follows: WIOA funding via CDE: The funding Jack L Hill receives from WIOA helps support staffing in order to offer ESL small group and conversation classes; one-on-one basic English tutoring for adults looking to improve their reading, writing, or English-speaking skills: and citizenship history and interview test preparation. CLLS: These grants help support staff funding as well as material supplies for programs and learners. These supplies and staff allow the Jack L Hill Lifelong Learning Center to offer additional tutoring and programs for adults whose first language is English but still need help with improving their reading and writing skills in order to be successful in their careers and daily lives. Funding is also provided to offer programs for learners and their families to teach new skills and ways to interact and support their family members and community. The funding for CLLS Adult and Family Literacy Services have been received in the past as separate amounts. This year the California State Library is offering funding in “block grant” format allowing Libraries some flexibility in deciding its amounts for each program as long as minimum amounts are met. While the annual funding amount from the California Department of Education has fallen from roughly half from that received in the fall of 2023 for FY 2023/24 – it’s expected that while 10% of the Literacy Program Coordinator’s salary has been paid from the Library’s General Fund budget – the Library can pay for 50% of the Literacy Program Coordinator’s salary and benefits from its general fund budget for FY 2024/25 to cover that difference. That one-time funding is expected from savings from the Library network replacement costing less than anticipated        Packet Page. 278 2 3 3 8 The Library received its Grant for Award Letter in April for $53,642 of ESL funding for Fiscal Years 2024/25 and 2025/26 so it was adopted as part of the City’s Fiscal Year 2024/25 budget. 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals The acceptance and administration of this funding aligns with Key Target No. 1: Financial Stability and Key Target No. 3: Improved Quality of Life, with customer service. Fiscal Impact There is no fiscal impact to the General Fund in FY 2024/25 with the acceptance of this grant as there are no fund match requirements. Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-217, approving: 1. Accepting grant funding of $50,000 from the California Department of Education (CDE) and a “block grant” of $73,200 for Adult and Family Literacy Services from the California State Library’s California Library Literacy Services (CLLS) Program. 2. Authorizing the Interim Director of Finance and Management Services to amend the FY 2024/25 Operating Budget for the Literacy program including adjusting the CDE budget to account for any differences in the estimated grant funding versus the actual grant funding received and appropriating $73,200 of grant funding in both revenues and expenditures for the California Adult and Family Literacy Programs. Attachments Attachment 1 - Resolution 2024-217 Attachment 2 - California Department of Education Grant Award Letter Attachment 3 - CLLS Adult Literacy and Family Literacy Grant Award Letter Ward: All Wards Synopsis of Previous Council Actions: June 26, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopted Resolution No. 2024-142 approving the City of San Bernardino’s Fiscal Years 2024/25 and 2025/26 Operating Budget and Capital Improvement Plan including $53,642 of funding for Fiscal Years 2024/25 and 2025/26 for English as a Second        Packet Page. 279 2 3 3 8 Language from the California State Library for Literacy Program services. May 1, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopted Resolution No. 2024092, authorizing the Director of Finance and Management Services to amend and appropriate $29,786 in grant funding from the California Department of Education in both revenues and expenditures to the Fiscal Year 2023 – 2024 Operating Budget for the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, Title II: Adult Education and Family Literacy Act program. This was one-time supplemental funding. October 4, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopted Resolution No. 2023-148 approving grant funding in the amounts of $99,287 from the California Department of Education; $60,719 for Adult Literacy Services, $20,615 for Family Literacy Services and $43,642 for English as a Second Language from the California State Library for Literacy Program services. August 16, 2023 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approved the following: A technical correction of the grant funding that was accepted on November 2, 2022 (Resolution No. 2022- 231). Increasing the Library Department authorized staffing by two full-time positions one Assistant Literacy Program Coordinator and one Library Assistant for FY 2023/24. November 2, 2022 Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2022-231 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Accepting grant funding in the amounts of $141,840 from the California Department of Education; $67,465 for Adult Literacy Services, $22,906 for Family Literacy Services and $53,642 for English as a Second Language from the California State Library for Literacy Program services. 2. Authorizing the Agency Director of Administrative Services to amend the FY 2022/23 Adopted Budget for the Literacy Program including appropriating $53,642 in both revenues and expenditures for the new English as a Second Language Program and adjusting the Grant Fund budget to account for differences in estimated grant funding and actual grant funds received. March 2, 2022 Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution 2022-45 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California authorizing the acceptance of grant funding in the amount of $87,752 from the California State Library's California Library Literacy Services (CLLS) and authorizing the Director of Finance to amend the FY 2021/22 adopted budget for revenue and        Packet Page. 280 2 3 3 8 expenditures to appropriate the funding. Dec. 1, 2021 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, accepted the Fiscal Year 2021/22 First Quarter Report and adopted Resolution No. 2021-289, authorizing an amendment to the FY 2021/22 General Fund Operating Budget in the amount of $414,500, which included authorizing acceptance of grant funding in the amount of $128,828 from the California Department of Education.        Packet Page. 281 Resolution No. 2024-217 Resolution 2024-217 November 6, 2024 Page 1 of 3 5 5 5 9 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-217 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE INTERIM DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO ACCEPT GRANT FUNDING IN THE AMOUNTS OF $50,000 FROM THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (CDE) AND A “BLOCK GRANT” OF $73,200 FOR ADULT AND FAMILY LITERACY SERVICES FROM THE CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY’S CALIFORNIA LIBRARY LITERACY SERVICES (CLLS) PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE INTERIM DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO AMEND THE FY 2024/25 LITERACY PROGRAM BUDGET INCLUDING ADJUSTING THE CDE PROGRAM BUDGET TO ACCOUNT FOR ANY DIFFERENCES IN THE ESTIMATED GRANT FUNDING VERSUS THE ACTUAL GRANT FUNDS RECEIVED AND APPROPRIATING $73,200 OF GRANT FUNDING IN BOTH REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR CALIFORNIA ADULT AND FAMILY LITERACY PROGRAMS. WHEREAS The San Bernardino Public Library (SBPL) has a Literacy Department at the Feldheym Central Library, in the Jack L. Hill Lifelong Learning Center, that is mostly grant funded. The Literacy Department budget, adopted by the Mayor and City Council, is a projection as the actual amounts from the CDE and Adult and Family Literacy Services from CLLS is not known until the fall of each year. The Literacy Program applies for these grants on annual basis. The CDE funding is from the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), Title II: Adult Education and Family Literacy Act. The Literacy Program is a partner of the San Bernardino County Workforce Development Board; and WHEREAS, Literacy offers various services to help City residents improve their lives. Besides basic English and English as a Second Language (ESL) literacy services, Jack L. Hill Lifelong Learning Center also offers citizenship history and interview classes, and homework assistance for students in kindergarten through eighth grade for English and math at the Feldheym Central Library; and BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1.The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2. The Mayor and City Council hereby accept grant funding in the amount of $50,000 from the CDE and a “block grant” of $73,200 for Adult and Family Literacy Services        Packet Page. 282 Resolution No. 2024-217 Resolution 2024-217 November 6, 2024 Page 2 of 3 5 5 5 9 from CLLS and authorizing the Interim Director of Finance and Management Services to accept and amend the FY 2024/25 budget for the Literacy Program, including adjusting the CDE program budget to account for any differences in the estimated grant funding versus the actual grant funds received and appropriating $73,200 of grant funding in both revenues and expenditures for the California Adult and Family Literacy Programs. SECTION 3. The Mayor and City Council finds this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that the activity is covered by the general rule 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, as in this case, 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. SECTION 4.Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable. SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately. APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 6th day of November 2024. Helen Tran, Mayor City of San Bernardino Attest: Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk Approved as to form: _ Sonia Carvalho, City Attorney        Packet Page. 283 Resolution No. 2024-217 Resolution 2024-217 November 6, 2024 Page 3 of 3 5 5 5 9 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) I, Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2024-217, adopted at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of November 2024 by the following vote: Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT SANCHEZ _____ _____ _______ _______ IBARRA _____ _____ _______ _______ FIGUEROA _____ _____ _______ _______ SHORETT _____ _____ _______ _______ REYNOSO _____ _____ _______ _______ CALVIN _____ _____ _______ _______ ALEXANDER _____ _____ _______ _______ WITNESS my hand and official seal of the City of San Bernardino this ___ day of ____________ 2024. Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk        Packet Page. 284        Packet Page. 285        Packet Page. 286        Packet Page. 287 Library Courts Building 916-323-9759 P.O. Box 942837 csl-adm@library.ca.gov Sacramento, CA 94237-0001 www.library.ca.gov August 22, 2024 Ed Erjavek San Bernardino Public Library 555 West 6th Street San Bernardino, CA 92410 Dear Mr. Erjavek, California Library Literacy Services program and the important work that you, your staff, and your volunteers do in your community. The state budget continues to provide $7.32 million in California Library Literacy Services funding for Adult Literacy Services and Family Literacy Services. Your total award amount for the 2024-2025 fiscal year beginning July 1, 2024, is: Adult Literacy and Family Literacy Services: $73,200 Total Award: $73,200 CLLS programs with Family Literacy Services will receive one award total, referred to as a -2025 program period. Your library is responsible for allocating award funds between Adult Literacy Services and Family Literacy Services to respond to community needs and for adhering to the following requirements: At least 51 percent of the block grant award must be allocated to Adult Literacy Services. At least 26 percent of the block grant award must be allocated to Family Literacy Services. Programs who requested a fixed award for Family Literacy Services may adjust their request by +/- 25 percent. Contact your state team for support. The block grant model does not apply to English as a Second Language Services funds for the 2024-2025 and 2025-2026 program periods. Your award will be claimed in two stages. The claim form included in this award packet will allow you to request the first 90% of your total award: Total Initial Award Amount: $65,880 Information about claiming the rest of your award is included in the payment schedule at the end of your award packet. You must encumber your funds by June 30, 2025. You must fully expend funds by September 30, 2024, in accordance with your approved budget on file with the State Library. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 288 Library Courts Building 916-323-9759 P.O. Box 942837 csl-adm@library.ca.gov Sacramento, CA 94237-0001 www.library.ca.gov and for which a budget has been provided to and approved by the State Library. Review the California Library Literacy Services Allowable and Unallowable Expenses guidelines to ensure program expenditures are consistent with the California Library Literacy Services allowable expenses. If you have questions about expenses or expending award funds, contact Allyson Jeffredo at CLLS@library.ca.gov. We strongly encourage your program staff to develop and maintain community partners to strengthen your program, attend regular regional library literacy network meetings, participate in your local Adult Education Consortium/a, and participate in library literacy training opportunities offered by the regional networks and the State Library to meet the California Library Literacy Services Mission, Values, and Program Essentials. Additional California Library Literacy Services resources can be found on the California Library Literacy Services website. The payment process begins when we receive your completed and signed claim form, certification form, and State Funded Grants Award Agreement and Certificate of Compliance included in this packet. All forms should be completed and signed through DocuSign to be processed for payment. Our library literacy staff are available to assist you throughout the year. Contact your Advisor Beverly Schwartzberg and your Grant Monitor Allyson Jeffredo at CLLS@library.ca.gov with any questions. Thank you for your willingness to do so much for those in your community. Best wishes for a successful year. Respectfully yours, Greg Lucas California State Librarian Cc: Beverly Schwartzberg, beverly.schwartzberg@library.ca.gov Allyson Jeffredo, allyson.jeffredo@library.ca.gov State Library Fiscal Office, stategrants.fiscal@library.ca.gov Alysha Cisneros, cisneros.aly@sbpl.org Ed Erjavek, erjavek.ed@sbpl.org Enc: Re: CLLS24-71: Claim form, certification form, and State Funded Grants Award Agreement and Certificate of Compliance Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063 9/6/2024        Packet Page. 289 San Bernardino Public Library THE BASICS YOUR GRANT AWARD The following provides basic information about your grant and managing your grant. Award #: CLLS24-71 Library: San Bernardino Public Library Total Award Amount: $73,200 APPROVED ALS BUDGET Salary, Wages, and Benefits $50,763 Consultant Fees $ 0 Travel $ 0 Supplies & Materials $2,872 Equipment ($5,000 or more per unit) $ 0 Services $ 0 Subtotal $53,635 Indirect $ 0 Grant Total $53,635 APPROVED FLS BUDGET Salary, Wages, and Benefits $19,565 Consultant Fees $ 0 Travel $ 0 Supplies & Materials $ 0 Equipment ($5,000 or more per unit) $ 0 Services $ 0 Subtotal $19,565 Indirect $ 0 Grant Total $19,565 Start Date: Upon execution End Date: June 30, 2025 It can take between eight to ten weeks following the receipt of an error free claim form before grant funds are delivered. If you have not received your payment after eight weeks, please contact your grant monitor. CONTACT We want your project to be successful. Please work with the program staff listed below to implement your project: Literacy Analyst: Allyson Jeffredo Phone Number: (916) 603-6709 Email Address: allyson.jeffredo@library.ca.gov Library Programs Consultant: Beverly Schwartzberg Phone Number: (916) 701-6880 Email Address: beverly.schwartzberg@library.ca.gov Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 290 San Bernardino Public Library CERTIFICATION I hereby certify under penalty of perjury: that I am the duly authorized representative of the claimant herein; that the claim is in all respects true, correct and in accordance with law and the terms of the agreement; and that payment has not previously been received for the amount claimed herein. The claims the indicated allowance for the purposes of carrying out the functions stated in its California Library Literacy Services application and in Sections 18880-18883 of the California Education Code. 555 West 6th Street, San Bernardino, CA 92410 SIGNED DATE Signature - Authorized representative Typed/Printed Name and Title of Authorized Representative Email address of authorized representative Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063 9/9/2024 erjavek.ed@sbpl.org Edward R. Erjavek        Packet Page. 291 San Bernardino Public Library PROJECT INFORMATION: Invoice #: CLLS24-71 Project Title: California Library Literacy Services Grantee: San Bernardino Public Library Funding Start Date: Upon execution Term Completion: June 30, 2025 Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 292 San Bernardino Public Library Total Award: $73,200 PAYMENT SCHEDULE: Libraries receive 90% of their total award amount upon receipt of the award letter. Libraries receive the final 10% payment of their total award after successful completion of the California Library Literacy Services Mid-Year Report form. NOTE: Libraries have 15 months to spend their California Library Literacy Services award funds, from July 1, 2024, in which the funds are awarded until September 30 of the following year. Total award Initial Payment (90% of total award) $65,880 Final Payment (10% of total award) $7,320 Total: $73,200 REPORTING: Libraries are required to submit a mid-year financial and narrative report and a final report. Reminder emails will be sent out beginning six weeks before the required report is due. Manage Your Current Grant website. The reporting schedule is detailed below. Mid-Year Report Due January 31, 2025 Final Report Due September 30, 2025 NOTE: A budget modification form will be required for all budget changes regardless of amount. Modification forms may be submitted throughout the year but no later than May 31. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 293 STATE-FUNDED GRANTS AWARD AGREEMENT AND CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 294 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 1 of 29 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT SUMMARY 2 PROCEDURES and REQUIREMENTS 3 A. Term of the Agreement 3 B. Scope of Work 3 C. Budget Detail 3 D. Narrative and Financial Reports 4 E. Claim Form and Payment 5 EXHIBIT A: TERMS and CONDITIONS 7 EXHIBIT B: CERTIFICATION of COMPLIANCE FORMS EXHIBIT C: CALIFORNIA LIBRARY LITERACY SERVICES GUIDELINES 22 26 Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 295 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 2 of 29 PROJECT SUMMARY AWARD AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE LIBRARY and San Bernardino Public Library for the California Library Literacy Services project. AWARD AGREEMENT NUMBER CLLS24-71 San Bernardino Public Library -funded California Library Literacy Services project. administers state and federal funds in the form of awards. The Grantee was selected by the State Library to receive state grant funds in the amount of $73,200 through the process adopted by the State Library in administering such grants. The State Library and the Grantee, for the consideration and under the conditions hereinafter set forth in the Grant Agreement, agree as follows: Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 296 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 3 of 29 PROCEDURES and REQUIREMENTS A. Term of the Agreement expenditure date is September 30, 2025. If completion of the project occurs prior to the end of the grant period, this will be the end date of the term of this agreement. Grant eligible program expenditures may begin no earlier than the start date. The project period ends on June 30, 2025, and all eligible program costs must be incurred by this date. B. Scope of Work 1. application and submitted to the State Library in response to the California Library Literacy Services project. 2. The following activities and deliverables to be performed by the Grantee include, but are not limited to the following: Maintain and keep records of expenditures related to the grant that are consistent with Generally Acceptable Accounting Practices (GAAP). Make financial records available to the State Library upon request. Work with the State Library staff to assure that funds are disbursed in compliance with the purpose of the grant. Prepare and submit required narrative and financial reports. Procure equipment, and other supplies as needed for the project. Issue contracts for services, personnel, and consultants as needed for the project. If applicable, make payments for services, including for hours worked and travel reimbursements, to consultants and contractors. Oversee the implementation of project activities. C. Budget Detail The State Library shall provide the Grantee funding for the expenses incurred in Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 297 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 4 of 29 Grantee shall request the distribution of grant funding consistent with its proposal and the budget worksheet that was included with the application. Under no circumstances shall payments exceed the total grant amount identified in this Agreement. D. Narrative and Financial Reports 1. The Grantee shall be responsible for submission of interim and final narrative and financial reports on the progress and activities of the project, to the California State Library, using the sample report documents provided by the California State Library. 2. All the reports must be current, include all required sections and documents, and must be approved by the Grant Monitor before any payment request can be processed. Failure to comply with the specified reporting requirements may be considered a breach of this Agreement and result in the termination of the Agreement or rejection of the payment request and/or forfeiture by the Grantee of claims for costs incurred that might otherwise have been eligible for grant funding. Any problems or delays must be reported immediately to the Grant Monitor. The financial reports shall reflect the expenditures made by the Grantee under the Agreement and may be incorporated into the same reporting structure as the narrative reports. 3. The reports shall be submitted by the following dates: Reporting Period Report Due Date July 1 - December 31 Mid-Year Report Due January 31, 2025 July 1 - June 30 Final Report Due September 30, 2025 4. Failure to submit timely reports with the appropriate documentation by the due date may result in rejection of the payment request and/or forfeiture by the Grantee of claims for costs incurred that might otherwise have been eligible for grant funding. 5. The Grantee agrees to maintain records and supporting documentation pertaining to the performance of this grant, subject to possible audit for a minimum of five (5) years after final payment date or grant term end date, whichever is later. Please refer to Exhibit A, Terms and Conditions for more information. 6. In addition to the foregoing, the Grantee shall submit to the State Library such periodic reports, updates, documents and any information as deem necessary by the State Library to monitor compliance and/or perform program Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 298 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 5 of 29 evaluation. Any requested data or information shall be submitted in electronic format on a form specified by the State Library. E. Claim Form and Payment 1. The California State Library shall provide the Grantee payment as outlined in the payment schedule only if all requirements for claiming the funds as outline in this document have been met, and only for those activities and costs specified in the approved award application. 2. The Grantee shall complete, sign, and submit Certification of Compliance form (Exhibit B) and the Financial Claim form (included in your award packet), to the California State Library within 14 days of receiving this award packet. These forms will be issued, signed, and submitted using the online signature and agreement platform, DocuSign, unless DocuSign is unallowable or inconsistent with practices and policies of the local jurisdiction. If the use of DocuSign is not acceptable to your organization, please contact your grant monitor regarding alternate options. 3. Any of the sums appearing under the categories in the approved budget may be adjusted with prior authorization from the California State Library Grant Monitor. This would be to increase the allotment with the understanding that there will be corresponding decreases in the other allotments so that the total amount paid by the California State Library to the Grantee under this Agreement shall not exceed the awarded amount, which shall be expended/encumbered during the grant period. 4. If the payment amount made by the California State Library exceeds the actual expenses incurred during the term of this Agreement, as reflected in the financial reports to be filed by the Grantee, the Grantee shall immediately refund the excess payment amount to the California State Library. 5. responsibility to pay all contractors and subcontractors for purchased goods and services. 6. The Final Payment of 10% (if applicable) will be withheld and retained by the California State Library until all conditions agreed upon in this Agreement, including submission and grant monitor approval of the interim and final narrative and financial reports, have been satisfied. 7. Prompt Payment Clause The California State Library will make payments to the Grantee in accordance with the Prompt Payment Clause under Government Code, section 927, et. seq. The Grantee may typically expect payment within 45 days from the date a grant payment request is properly submitted and approved by the Grant Monitor. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 299 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 6 of 29 8. Budget Contingency Clause a. It is mutually agreed that if the Budget Act of the current fiscal year or any subsequent years covered under this Agreement does not appropriate sufficient funds for the program, this Agreement shall no longer be in full force and effect. In this event, the California State Library shall have no liability to pay any funds whatsoever to the Grantee or to furnish any other considerations under this Agreement and the Grantee shall not be obligated to perform any provisions of this Agreement. b. If funding for any fiscal year is reduced or deleted by the Budget Act for purposes of this Program, the California State Library shall have the option to either cancel this Agreement with no liability occurring to itself or offer an Agreement amendment to the Grantee to reflect the reduced amount. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 300 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 7 of 29 EXHIBIT A: TERMS and CONDITIONS 1. Accessibility: The State is responsible for ensuring that public websites are accessible to both the general public and state employees, including persons with disabilities. Grantee shall assist the State in meeting its responsibility. Therefore, all project materials generated by state funded programs must meet the California Accessibility Standards.Additionally all project materials designed, developed, and maintained shall be in compliance with the California Government Code, sections 7405 and 11135, and the current Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, as published by the Web Accessibility Initiative of the World Wide Web Consortium at a minimum Level AA success criteria. However, if for some reason project material is not generated to be in compliance to meet these standards, please still submit it to the State Library. When submitting The California State Library reserves the right to post project materials to its website that are in compliance with these standards. 2. Acknowledgment: The State of California and the California State Library shall be acknowledged in all promotional materials and publications related to the California Library Literacy Services project. a. Grant award recipients must ensure that the State of California receives full credit as the source of funds and that the California State Library, likewise, is acknowledged as the administrator. b. Publications and information releases about the project must credit the State of California. An appropriate statement for a publication or project press release is: [publication/project] was supported in whole or in part by funding provided by the State of California, administered by the Grantees must include the above statement in any publications, vehicle wraps, and promotional materials, including websites. If space is limited the State Library logo and the following shortened acknowledgement statement is acceptable: Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 301 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 8 of 29 c. This credit line on products of a project, such as materials, is important to foster support from the public, and state funding sources. d. California State Library Logo: Use of the California State Library logo, which can be downloaded on the California State Library website, is required on any publication, vehicle wrap, or promotional material along with the above statement(s). e. Photo Documentation: Digital photos are a great way to document the happenings of your project. It is recommended that you use a photo release release form or contact your grant monitor for the State Libra 3. Agency: In the performance of this Agreement the Grantee and its agents and employees shall act in an independent capacity and not as officers, employees or agents of the California State Library. The Grantee is solely responsible for all activities supported by the grant. Nothing in this Agreement creates a partnership, agency, joint venture, employment, or any other type of relationship between the parties. The Grantee shall not represent itself as an agent of the California State Library for any purpose and has no authority to bind the State Library in any manner whatsoever. 4. Amendment: No amendment or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing, signed by the parties, and approved as required. No oral understanding or agreement not incorporated into this Agreement is binding on any of the parties. This Agreement may be amended, modified or augmented by mutual consent of the parties, subject to the requirements and restrictions of this paragraph. 5. Applicable law: The laws of the State of California shall govern all proceedings concerning the validity and operation of this Agreement and the performance of the obligations imposed upon the parties hereunder. The parties hereby waive any right to any other venue. The place where the Agreement is entered into and place where the obligation is incurred is Sacramento County, California. 6. Assignment, Successors, and Assigns: The Grantee may not assign this Agreement or delegate its performance to any third-party person or entity, either provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the California State Library, the Grantee, and their respective successors and assigns. 7. Audit and Records Access: The Grantee agrees that the California State Library, the Department of General Services, the State Auditor, or their designated representatives shall have the right to review, audit, inspect and copy any records and supporting documentation pertaining to the performance of this Agreement. The Grantee agrees to maintain such records for possible audit for Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 302 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 9 of 29 a minimum of five (5) years after the final payment, or grant term end date, whichever is later, unless a longer period of records retention is stipulated, or until completion of any action and resolution of all issues which may arise as a result of any litigation, dispute, or audit, whichever is later. The Grantee agrees to allow the auditor(s) access to such records during normal business hours and to allow interviews of any employees who might reasonably have information related to such records. Further, the Grantee agrees to include a similar right of the State to audit records and interview staff in any subcontract related to performance of this Agreement. Examples of audit documentation may include, but not limited to, competitive bids, grant amendments, if any, relating to the budget or work plan, copies of any agreements with contractors or subcontractors if utilized, expenditure ledger, payroll register entries, time sheets, personnel expenditure summary form, travel expense log, paid warrants, contracts and change orders, samples of items and materials developed with grant funds, invoices and/or cancelled checks. 8. Authorized Representative: Grantee and the California State Library mutually represent that their authorized representatives have the requisite legal authority 9. Communication: All communications from either party, including an interim check-in at any time during the grant term, shall be directed to the respective grant manager or representative of the California State Library or Grantee. For this purpose, the following contact information is provided below: San Bernardino Public Library Ed Erjavek 555 West 6th Street San Bernardino, CA 92410 erjavek.ed@sbpl.org [California State Library] Allyson Jeffredo [900 N Street [Sacramento, CA 95814] Allyson.jeffredo@library.ca.gov 916-603-6709 Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 303 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 10 of 29 1. Confidentiality: Grantee will maintain as confidential any material it receives or produces that is marked Confidential or is inherently confidential or is protected by privilege. Grantee agrees to alert the State Library to this status in advance, and State Library agrees to maintain this status in conformity with the Public Records Act. 2. Contractor and Subcontractors: Nothing contained in this Grant Agreement or otherwise shall create any contractual relation between the State and any contractor or subcontractors, and no contract or subcontract shall relieve the Grantee of his or her responsibilities and obligations hereunder. The Grantee agrees to be as fully responsible to the State for the acts and omissions of its contractors, subcontractors, volunteers, student interns and of persons either directly or indirectly employed by any of them as it is for the acts and omissions of persons contractors and subcontractors is an independent obligation from the the State shall have no obligation to pay or to enforce the payment of any monies to any contractor or subcontractor. 3. Copyright: Grantee owns and retains titles to any copyrights or copyrightable material from any original works that it creates within the scope of this Agreement in accordance with the federal Copyright Act. (17 U.S.C. 101, et seq.) Grantee is responsible for obtaining any necessary licenses, permissions, releases or authorizations to use text, images, or other materials owned, copyrighted, or trademarked by third parties and for extending such licenses, permissions, releases, or authorizations to the California State Library pursuant to this section. Also, the California State Library may upload, post or transmit copyrighted material produced or purchased with grant funds on a California State Library website for public access and viewing. 4. Discharge of Grant Obligations: The Grantee's obligations under this Agreement shall be deemed discharged only upon acceptance of the final report by California State Library. If the Grantee is a non-profit entity, the e final report prior to its submission to California State Library. 5. Dispute Resolution: In the event of a dispute, Grantee will discuss the problem informally with the Grant Monitor. If unresolved, the Grantee shall ten (10) days of discovery of the problem. Within ten (10) days of receipt, the Grant Monitor shall meet with the Grantee for purposes of resolving the dispute. Any dispute arising under the terms of this Agreement which is not disposed of within a reasonable period of time, the Grantee may bring it to the attention of the State Librarian or the designated representative. The decision of the State Librarian or designated representative shall be final. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 304 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 11 of 29 Unless otherwise instructed by the Grant Monitor, the Grantee shall continue with its responsibilities under this Agreement during any dispute. 6. Drug-free Workplace: The Grantee certifies under penalty of perjury under the laws of California, that the Grantee will comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 (Gov. Code, § 8350 et. seq.) and will provide a drug-free workplace by taking the following actions: a. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations. b. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program to inform employees about all of the following: 1) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace. 2) -free workplace; 3) Any available counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs. 4) Penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. c. Require that every employee who works on the Agreement will: 1) -free workplace policy statement. 2) condition of employment on the Agreement. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in suspension of payments under the Agreement or termination of the Agreement or both and grantee may be ineligible for award of any future state agreements if the California State Library determines that the grantee has made a false certification or violated the certification by failing to carry out the requirements as noted above. 7. Effectiveness of Agreement: This Agreement is of no force or effect until signed by both parties. 8. Entire Agreement: This Agreement supersedes all prior agreements, oral or written, made with respect to the subject hereof and, together with all attachments hereto, contains the entire agreement of the parties. 9. Exclusive Agreement: This is the entire Agreement between the California State Library and Grantee. 10. Executive Order N-6-22-Russia Sanctions: The Grantee shall comply with Executive Order N-6-22 (the EO) regarding Economic Sanctions against Ukraine, as well as any sanctions imposed under state law. The EO directs state agencies to terminate grant agreements with, and to refrain from entering any new grant agreements with, individuals or entities that are Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 305 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 12 of 29 determined to be a target of Economic Sanctions. Accordingly, should the State determine Grantee is a target of Economic Sanctions or is conducting prohibited transactions with sanctioned individuals or entities, that shall be grounds for termination of this agreement. The State shall provide Grantee advance written notice of such termination, allowing Grantee at least 30 calendar days to provide a written response. Termination shall be at the sole discretion of the State. 11. Extension: The State Librarian or designee may extend the final deadline for must be made in writing and received by the California State Library at least 30 days prior to the final deadline. 12. Failure to Perform: The grant being utilized by the Grantee is to benefit the California Library Literacy Services project. If the Grant Monitor determines the Grantee has not complied with this Agreement, the Grantee may forfeit the right to reimbursement of any grant funds not already paid by the California State Library, including, but not limited to, the ten percent (10%) withhold. 13. Federal and State Taxes: The State Library shall not: a. Withhold Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) payments from behalf; or b. Make Federal or State unemployment insurance contributions on c. Grantee shall pay all taxes required on payments made under this Agreement including applicable income taxes and FICA. 14. Force Majeure: Neither the California State Library nor the Grantee, its contractors, vendors, or subcontractors, if any, shall be responsible hereunder for any delay, default, or nonperformance of this Agreement, to the extent that such delay, default, or nonperformance is caused by an act of God, weather, accident, labor strike, fire, explosion, riot, war, rebellion, sabotage, flood, or other contingencies unforeseen by the California State Library or the Grantee, its contractors, vendors, or subcontractors, and beyond the reasonable control of such party. 15. Forfeit of Grant Funds and Repayment of Funds Improperly Expended: If grant funds are not expended, or have not been expended, in accordance with this Agreement, the State Librarian or designee, at his or her sole discretion, may take appropriate action under this Agreement, at law or in equity, including requiring the Grantee to forfeit the unexpended portion of the grant funds, including, but not limited to, the ten percent (10%) withhold, and/or to repay to the California State Library any funds improperly expended. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 306 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 13 of 29 16. Fringe Benefit Ineligibility: Grantee agrees that neither the Grantee nor its employees and contract personnel are eligible to participate in any employee pension, health benefit, vacation pay, sick pay or other fringe benefit plan of the State of California or the State Library. 17. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles: The Grantee is required to use Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in documenting all grant expenditures. 18. Grant Monitor: progress and reviewing and approving Grant Payment Requests and other documents delivered to the California State Library pursuant to this Agreement. The Grant Monitor may monitor Grantee performance to ensure Grantee expends grant funds appropriately and, in a manner, consistent with the terms and conditions contained herein. The Grant Monitor does not have the authority to approve any deviation from or revision to the Terms and Conditions (Exhibit A) or the Procedures and Requirements unless such authority is expressly stated in the Procedures and Requirements. 19. Grantee: the government or legal entity to which a grant is awarded, and which is accountable to the California State Library for the use of the funds provided. a. The grantee will make reports to the State Librarian in such form and containing such information as may be required to ensure the proper agreement. The grantee will keep such records and afford such access as the California State Library may find necessary to assure the correctness and verification of such reports. 20. Grantee Accountability: The Grantee is ultimately responsible and accountable for the manner in which the grant funds are utilized and accounted for and the way the grant is administered, even if the Grantee has contracted with another organization, public or private, to administer or operate its grant program. In the event an audit should determine that grant funds are owed to the California State Library, the Grantee is responsible for repayment of the funds to the California State Library. 21. Grantee Funds: It is mutually agreed that the Grantee is responsible for furnishing funds beyond the grant award that may be necessary to complete the project. 22. Independent Action: Grantee reserves the right to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement in an independent manner, at any location and at any time within the agreed- personnel shall perform all services required by this Agreement, but their time need not be devoted solely to fulfilling obligations under this Agreement. Grantee shall furnish all equipment and materials used to meet its obligations and complete the Project. The State Library shall not provide Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 307 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 14 of 29 any personnel or other resources beyond the grant award and is not required to provide training in connection with this Agreement. 23. Indemnification: Grantee agrees to indemnify, defend and save harmless the State of California, the California State Library and its officers, employees, and agents, from any and all claims, losses, and liabilities accruing or resulting to any and all contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, laborers and any other person, firm or corporation furnishing or supplying work services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of this Agreement, and from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any person, firm or corporation who may be injured or damaged by Grantee in the performance of this Agreement. 24. License to Use: The California State Library reserves a fully paid-up, royalty- free, nonexclusive, sub-licensable and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, prepare derivative works, distribute or otherwise use, and to authorize third parties to use, any material received or maintained by Grantee in connection with this Agreement. This includes intellectual property, with or without third-party rights. All such usages will be for public library and State governmental purposes: a. The copyright in any work developed under this grant, sub-grant, or contract under this grant or sub-grant; and b. Any rights of copyright to which a Grantee, sub-grantee, or a contractor purchases ownership with grant support. 25. Limitation of Expenditure: Expenditure for all projects must conform to the regulations. The total amount paid by the California State Library to the Grantee under this agreement shall not exceed $73,200 and shall be expended/encumbered in the designated award period. During the award period, the grantee may find that the awarded budget may need to be modified. Budget changes, requests for additional funds, or requests for reductions in award funding must be discussed with the assigned State Library Grant Monitor and a Grant Award Modification may be required to be submitted according to the instructions. Approval is by the State Librarian or their designee. Adjustments should be reported on the next financial report. Any adjustments in approved budgets must be documented and documentation retained in project accounts. 26. Lobbying: Grantee confirms that the grant funds will not be used for the purposes of lobbying or otherwise attempting to influence legislation, as those purposes are defined by the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986. 27. Non-Discrimination Clause: During this grant period, the Grantee and the Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 308 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 15 of 29 harass, or allow harassment against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status. Grantee shall insure that the evaluation and treatment of contractors, employees and applicants for employment are free from such discrimination and harassment. Additionally, Grantee, contractors, and subcontractors, if applicable, shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code §12900 et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, §11000 et seq.), the provisions of Article 9.5, Chapter 1, Part 1, Division 3, Title 2 of the Government Code (Gov. Code §§ 11135-11139.5), and the regulations or standards adopted by the California State Library to implement such article. Grantee shall permit access by representatives of the Department of Civil Rights and the California State Library upon reasonable notice at any time to such of its books, records, accounts, and all other sources of information and its facilities as said Department or the California State Library shall require ascertaining compliance with this clause. Grantee, and its contractors, and subcontractors shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other agreement. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, §11105.) Grantee shall include the non-discrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all contracts and subcontracts to perform work under the Agreement. 28. Notices: All notices and other communications in connection with this Agreement shall be in writing, and shall be considered delivered as follows: a. Electronic Mail (E-mail): When sent by e-mail to the last e-mail address of the recipient known to the party giving notice. Notice is effective upon transmission. b. DocuSign (e-signature platform): When sent via DocuSign a notification will be sent to the last e-mail address of the recipient known to the party giving notice. Notice is effective upon transmission. c. Grants Management System: When sent via / uploaded to the will be sent to the last e-mail address of the recipient known to the party giving notice. Notice is effective upon transmission. d. Personally: address as stated in this Agreement. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 309 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 16 of 29 e. U.S. Mail: Five days after being deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage Agreement. 29. Order of Precedence: The performance of this Agreement shall be conducted in accordance with the Terms and Conditions, Procedures and Requirements, Certificate of Compliance, Project Summary, Activities Timeline, and Budget, of this Agreement, or other combination of exhibits specified on the Grant Agreement Coversheet attached hereto - herein by this reference. In the event of conflict or inconsistency between the articles, exhibits, attachments, specifications or provisions that constitute this Agreement, the following order of precedence shall apply: a. Grant Agreement Coversheet and any Amendments thereto b. Terms and Conditions c. Procedures and Requirements d. Certificate of Compliance e. Project Summary f. g. All other attachments hereto, including any that are incorporated by reference. 30. Payment: a. The approved Budget, if applicable, is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and states the maximum amount of allowable costs for each of the tasks identified in the Project Summary and Activity Timeline included in the project application. California State Library shall provide funding to the Application at only those costs specified in the Budget and incurred in the term of the Agreement. b. The Grantee shall carry out the work described in the Work Plan or in or modifications to the Work Plan, approved project as described in performing the changed work or incurring the changed cost. If the Grantee fails to obtain such prior written approval, the State Librarian or designee, at his or her sole discretion, may refuse to provide funds to pay for such work or costs. c. The Grantee shall request funds in accordance with the funding schedule included in this agreement. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 310 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 17 of 29 d. Ten percent (10%) will be withheld from the Payment Request (if applicable) and paid at the end of the grant term, when all reports and conditions stipulated in this Agreement have been satisfactorily completed. Failure by the grantee to satisfactorily complete all reports and conditions stipulated in this Agreement may result in forfeiture of any such funds withheld. e. to the amounts authorized in the California State Administrative Manual (see Exhibit C or contact the Grant Monitor for more information). f. Payment will be made only to the Grantee. g. Reimbursable expenses shall not be incurred unless and until the grantee receives a Notice to Proceed as described in the Procedures and Requirements. 31. Personal Jurisdiction: The Grantee consents to personal jurisdiction in the State of California for all proceedings concerning the validity and operation of this Agreement and the performance of the obligations imposed upon the parties. Native American Tribal grantees expressly waive tribal sovereign immunity as a defense to any and all proceedings concerning the validity and operation of this Agreement and the performance of the obligations imposed upon the parties. 32. Personnel Costs: Any personnel expenditures to be paid for with grant funds must be computed based on actual time spent on grant-related activities and on the actual salary or equivalent hourly wage the employee is paid for their regular job duties, including a proportionate share of any benefits to which the employee is entitled. 33. Pledge: This Agreement shall not be interpreted to create any pledge or any commitment by the State Library to make any other or further grants or contributions to Grantee, or any other person or entity in connection with the Project. It is mutually agreed that Grantee is responsible for furnishing funds beyond the grant award that may be necessary to complete outcomes or deliverables. 34. Privacy Protection: Both parties agree to protect the confidentiality of any non-public, personal information that may be contained in materials received or produced in connection with this Agreement, as required by Civil Code, section 1798, et. seq. 35. Prohibited Use: The expenditure under this program shall not be used to supplant Grantee efforts in other grant programs provided by the California State Library. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 311 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 18 of 29 36. Public Records Act: Material maintained or used by the California State Government Code, sections 6250, et. seq. This includes the Interim and Final reports, and any other written communications between the parties. Grantee agrees to ensure that all content contained in its written reports are appropriate for publication. Said material, along with all other reports, documentation and data collected during the term of the Agreement, will be subject to disclosure unless it qualifies for exemption under the PRA in whole or in part. Grantee agrees to alert the State Library as to a basis for exemption, if any exists. 37. Publicity Obligations: Grantee will notify the State Library of any promotional materials or publications resulting from the grant no later than five (5) days in advance of distribution, whether they are print, film, electronic, or in any other format or medium. Copies of all promotional materials will be provided to the State Library. Grantee will acknowledge Library may include information about this grant and its outcomes in its own annual reports, with specific reference to Grantee, and may distribute such information to third parties. 38. Records: Communications, grant related documents, data, original receipts, and invoices must be maintained by Grantee and shall be made available to the State Library upon request. Grantee agrees to maintain adequate grant program records and adequate financial records consistent with generally accepted accounting practices, and to retain all records for at least five (5) years after the end-of-term. The State Library ensure compliance with this Agreement, with reasonable advance notice. 39. Reduction of Waste: In the performance of this Agreement, Grantee shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that materials purchased or utilized in the course of the project are not wasted. Steps should include, but not be limited to: the use of used, reusable, or recyclable products; discretion in the amount of materials used; alternatives to disposal of materials consumed; and the practice of other waste reduction measures where feasible and appropriate. 40. Reimbursement Limitations: Under no circumstances shall the Grantee seek reimbursement pursuant to this Agreement for a cost or activity that has been or will be paid for through another funding source. The Grantee shall not seek reimbursement for any costs used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other California State Library funded program. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 312 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 19 of 29 41. Reports and Claims: It is the responsibility of the grantee make the required reports and claims to the California State Library. a. The grantee shall be responsible for submitting to the State Library Narrative Reports detailing progress and activities. The reports are due on the dates specified in the reporting schedule detailed in the Procedures and Requirements section. b. The grantee shall be responsible for submitting to the State Library Financial Reports reflecting grantee expenditure activity. The reports are due on the dates specified in the reporting schedule detailed in the Procedures and Requirements section. c. To obtain payment hereunder the grantee shall submit authorized claims provided by the State Library for that purpose, on each of the following mentioned dates for payment, and the California State Library agrees to reimburse the Library as soon thereafter as State fiscal procedures will permit. d. The final 10% of the grant award (if applicable) is payable only upon approval of all final reports and receipt of claim form. Failure to administrative duty under the award. e. Payment will be provided to cover the expenditures incurred by the grantee for the project in the following manner: o $65,880 upon execution of the agreement and submission of claim by the grantee organization. o A second payment will be made after the submission and approval of the first reports and receipt of claim form in the amount of $7,320. 42. Self- All expenditures for which reimbursement pursuant to this Agreement is sought shall be the result of -length transactions and not the result of, or motivated by, self-dealing on the part of the Grantee or any employee or agent of the Grantee. For pur - both parties are on equal footing and fair market forces are at play, such as business and - where an individual or entity is obligated to act as a trustee or fiduciary, as when handling public funds, and chooses to act in a manner that will benefit the individual or entity, directly or indirectly, to the detriment of, and in conflict with, the public purpose for which all grant monies are to be expended. 43. Severability: If any part of this Agreement is found to be unlawful or unenforceable, such provisions will be voided and severed from this Agreement, but the remainder of the provisions in the Agreement will remain in full force and effect. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 313 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 20 of 29 44. Site Visits: The Grantee shall allow the California State Library to access and conduct site visits, with reasonable notice, at which grant funds are expended and related work being performed at any time during the performance of the work and for up to ninety (90) days after completion of the work, or until all issues related to the grant project have been resolved. A site visit may include, but not be limited to, monitoring the use of grant funds, provide technical assistance when needed, and to visit the State funded project. 45. Termination: The Agreement shall be subject to termination by the State Librarian or designee upon notice to the Grantee at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of termination. In the event this agreement is terminated, the Grantee shall deliver to the State Librarian copies of all reports, accounting, data, and materials prepared up to the date of termination. The State Librarian shall determine and pay the Grantee for necessary and appropriate expenditures and obligations up to the date of termination which have not been covered by prior installments previously paid to the Grantee. Upon such termination, the unused portion of the grant award must be returned to the California State Library within 45 days. If funding has been advanced to the Grantee, any unobligated balances, as determined by the State Librarian, shall be returned to the State Library within 45 days of the notice of termination. 46. Timeline: Time is of the essence to this Agreement. It is mutually agreed between the parties that the grant application and the timeline included therein are part of the Agreement. 47. Unused Funds: At the end-of-term Grantee agrees to return any unexpended or unaccounted for funds to the State Library, or to submit a written request for an extension of the grant period. Funds will be considered unexpended or unaccounted if they were: (1) not used for their intended purpose, or (2) used inconsistent with the terms of this Agreement. Funds will also be considered unaccounted for, and must be returned, if the proposal outcomes or deliverables are materially incomplete by the end-of- term or earlier termination, as determined by the State Library in its sole discretion. 48. Waiver of Rights: California State Library shall not be deemed to have waived any rights under this Agreement unless such waiver is given in writing and signed by California State Library. No delay or omission on the part of California State Library in exercising any rights shall operate as a waiver of such right or any other right. A waiver by California State Library of a provision of this Agreement shall not prejudice or constitute a waiver of t compliance with Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 314 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 21 of 29 that provision or any other provision of this Agreement. No prior waiver by California State Library, nor any course of dealing between California State Library and Grantee, shall constitute a waiver of any of California State transactions. Whenever the consent of California State Library is required under this Agreement, the granting of such consent by California State Library in any instance shall not constitute continuing consent to subsequent instances where such consent is required and in all cases such consent may be granted or withheld in the sole discretion of California State Library. 49. Work Products: Grantee shall provide California State Library with copies of all final products identified in the Work Plan and Application. Grantee shall also provide the State Library with copies of all public education and advertising material produced pursuant to this Agreement. 50. personnel. If Grantee hires employees to perform services required by this urance for them. The Grantee is aware of Labor Code Section 3700, which requires to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the Labor Code, and the Grantee agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Agreement. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 315 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 22 of 29 EXHIBIT B: CERTIFICATION of COMPLIANCE FORM 1. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE:I certify that the authorized representative named below is the legally designated representative of the Grantee for this Grant Agreement and project and is authorized to receive and expend funds in order to administer this grant program. 2.I certify that all information provided to the California State Library for review in association with this award is correct and complete to the best of my knowledge, and as the authorized representative of the Grantee, I commit to the conditions of this award, and I have the legal authority to do so. 3.I certify that any or all other participants or contractors in the grant program have agreed to the terms of the application/grant award and have entered into an agreement(s) concerning the final disposition of equipment, facilities, and materials purchased for this program from the funds awarded for the activities and services described in the attached, as approved and/or as amended in the application by the California State Librarian. 4.The authorized representative, on behalf of the Grantee, certifies that the Grantee will comply with all applicable requirements of State and Federal laws, regulations, and policies governing this program, to include the requirements listed below in this Certification of Compliance Form. 5.The authorized representative, on behalf of the Grantee, hereby certifies to the California State Library, for an award of funds in the amount $73,200. This award will provide library services as set forth in the Project Application as approved and/or as amended by the California State Librarian. 6. STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE: Grantee has, unless exempted, complied with the non-discrimination program requirements. (Gov. Code §12990 (a-f) and CCR, Title 2, Section 11102). 7. DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE REQUIREMENTS: Grantee will comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 and will provide a drug-free workplace by taking the following actions: a. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations. b. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program to inform employees about: 1) the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 316 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 23 of 29 2) the person's or organization's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; 3) any available counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs; and, 4) penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. c. Every employee who works on the proposed Agreement will: 1) receive a copy of the company's drug-free workplace policy statement; and, 2) agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a condition of employment on the Agreement. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in suspension of payments under the Agreement or termination of the Agreement or both and Grantee may be ineligible for award of any future State agreements if the department determines that any of the following has occurred: the Grantee has made false certification or violated the certification by failing to carry out the requirements as noted above. (Gov. Code § 8350 et. seq.) 8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Grantee needs to be aware of the following provisions regarding current or former state employees. If Grantee has any questions on the status of any person rendering services or involved with the Agreement, the California State Library must be contacted immediately for clarification. Current State Employees (Pub. Contract Code § 10410): a. No officer or employee shall engage in any employment, activity or enterprise from which the officer or employee receives compensation or has a financial interest, and which is sponsored or funded by any state agency, unless the employment, activity or enterprise is required as a condition of regular state employment. b. No officer or employee shall contract on his or her own behalf as an independent contractor with any state agency to provide goods or services. Former State Employees (Pub. Contract Code § 10411): a. For the two-year period from the date he or she left state employment, no former state officer or employee may enter into a contract in which he or she engaged in any of the negotiations, transactions, planning, arrangements or any part of the decision- making process relevant to the contract while employed in any capacity by any state agency. b. For the twelve-month period from the date he or she left state employment, no former state officer or employee may enter into a contract with any state agency if he or she was employed by that state agency in a policy-making position in the same general subject area as the proposed contract within the 12-month period prior to his or her leaving state service. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 317 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 24 of 29 If Grantee violates any provisions of above paragraphs, such action by Grantee shall render this Agreement void. (Pub. Contract Code § 10420). Members of boards and commissions are exempt from this section if they do not receive payment other than payment of each meeting of the board or commission, payment for preparatory time and payment for per diem. (Pub. Contract Code § 10430 (e)). 9. LABOR CODE/WORKERS' COMPENSATION: Grantee needs to be aware of the provisions which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions, and Grantee affirms to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Agreement. (Labor Code § 3700). 10. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT: Grantee assures the State that it complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as all applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA. (42 U.S.C. 12101 et. seq.) 11. RESOLUTION: For awards totaling $350,000 or more, a county, city, district, or other local public body must provide the State with a copy of a resolution, order, motion, or ordinance of the local governing body which by law has authority to enter into an agreement, authorizing execution of the agreement. 12. PAYEE DATA RECORD FORM STD. 204: This form must be completed by all Grantees that are not another state agency or other governmental entity. 13. DRUG FREE WORKPLACE: a. Continue to provide a drug-free workplace by complying with the requirements in 2 C.F.R. part 3186 (Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Financial Assistance)). In particular, the recipient must comply with drug- free workplace requirements in subpart B of 2 C.F.R. part 3186, which adopts the Government-wide implementation (2 C.F.R. part 182) of sections 5152-5158 of the Drug- Free Workplace Act of 1988 (P. L. 100-690, Title V, Subtitle D; 41 U.S.C. §§ 701-707). b. This includes but is not limited to: making a good faith effort, on a continuing basis, to maintain a drug-free workplace; publishing a drug-free workplace statement; establishing a drug-free awareness program for the employees; taking actions concerning employees who are convicted of violating drug statutes in the workplace. 14. ACCESSIBILITY: The organization receiving this award, as listed in the certification section below, and all program staff, will ensure all project materials will meet California accessibility standards. 15. NON-DISCRIMINATION: The organization receiving this award, as listed in the certification section below, and all program staff, agree to comply with all California non-discrimination laws. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 318 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 25 of 29 16. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The organization receiving this award, as listed in the certification section below, and all program staff, agree to comply with California State Library acknowledgement requirements. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 319 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 26 of 29 EXHIBIT C: CALIFORNIA LIBRARY LITERACY SERVICES GUIDELINES 1. California Library Literacy Services programs shall comply with the requirements in Sections 18880-18883 of the California Education Code. 2. California Library Literacy Services programs shall train and recruit volunteers to serve as tutors. Volunteer tutors are the primary instructors for the program. 3. California Library Literacy Services programs shall seek local government and community resources and develop cooperative relations with other local literacy services providers. 4. California Library Literacy Services programs will provide a base level of local and private fiscal support to be established by the California State Library. 5. In response to an expressed and recognized need from the field for specific program requirements, the California State Library and related stakeholders created a framework and program essentials. The framework and essentials describe what constitutes an effective program: a. California Library Literacy Services programs must use the Roles and Goals framework to implement and evaluate their literacy services. b. regional Library Literacy Network Meetings. c. Tutor training for volunteers should include, at a minimum, a program orientation, tutoring basics, and instruction on learner-driven services. d. California Library Literacy Services programs must align with the following program values: i. California Library Literacy Services is library based; ii. California Library Literacy Services is a core library service; iii. California Library Literacy Services is learner-driven; iv. California Library Literacy Services is community-focused; v. California Library Literacy Services is volunteer-supported; vi. California Library Literacy Services staff is professionally engaged; and vii. California Library Literacy Services supports families. 6. California Library Literacy Services Family Literacy programs (if applicable) shall provide services to prevent illiteracy through coordinated literacy and preliteracy services to families. Recruitment of parents not previously Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 320 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 27 of 29 included in public library literacy programs is a high priority. Family Literacy programs are implemented and evaluated using the Family Literacy Evaluation Framework. Certification ORGANIZATION Name: Address (official and complete): PROJECT COORDINATOR Name: Email: Phone: GRANTTEE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Name: Title: Email: Phone: Signature: Date: Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063 erjavek.ed@sbpl.org Library Director 9/9/2024 San Bernardino Public Library 555 W. Sixth St., San Bernardino, CA. 92410 909-381-8215cisneros.aly@sbpl.org Edward R. Erjavek 909-381-8210 Ally Cisneros        Packet Page. 321 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 28 of 29 Authorized Representative Signature ORGANIZATION Name: Address (official and complete): AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Signature: Date: Printed Name of Person Signing: Title: STATE OF CALIFORNIA Agency Name:California State Library Address: 900 N Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 Signature: Date: Printed Name of Person Signing: Title: California State Librarian Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063 9/6/2024 Greg Lucas 555 W. Sixth St., San Bernardino, CA. 92410 San Bernardino Public Library Library DirectorEdward R. Erjavek 9/9/2024        Packet Page. 322 San Bernardino Public Library California Library Literacy Services 2023-2024 CLLS24-71 Page 29 of 29 20 August 2024 RE: Contractor and Grantee Compliance with Economic Sanctions Imposed in Dear Grantee, You are receiving this notification because you currently have an active grant through the California State Library. On March 4, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-6-22 (EO) regarding sanctions in response to Russian aggression in Ukraine. The EO is located at https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/3.4.22-Russia-Ukraine-Executive- Order.pdf. to take certain immediate steps, including notifying all contractors and grantees of their obligations to comply with existing economic sanctions imposed by the U.S. government in response to Russia's actions in Ukraine, as well as any sanctions imposed under state law. This correspondence serves as a notice under the EO that as a contractor or grantee, Ukraine is required, including with respect to, but not limited to, the federal executive orders identified in the EO and the sanctions identified on the U.S. Department of the Treasury website (https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/sanctions- programs-and-country-information/ukraine-russia-related-sanctions). Failure to comply may result in the termination of contracts or grants, as applicable. Please note that for any agreements or grants valued at $5 million or more, a separate notification will be sent outlining additional requirements specified under the EO. Annly Roman California State Library 900 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 323 CA LIBRARY LITERACY AND ENGLISH ACQUISITION SERVICES FINANCIAL CLAIM 1st PAYMENT CERTIFICATION I hereby certify under penalty of perjury: that I am the duly authorized representative of the claimant herein; that this claim is in all respects true, correct and in accordance with law and the terms of the agreement; and that payment has not previously been received for the amount claimed herein. By (Signature of the Authorized Representative) (Print Name) (Title) *Legal payee name must match the payee’s federal tax return. Warrant will be made payable to payee name. Payee discrepancies in name and/or address may cause delay in payment. If you need to change payee name and/or address, please contact Fiscal Services at stategrants.fiscal@library.ca.gov. State of California, State Library Fiscal Office ENY: 2024 ITEM NO: 6120-213-0001, Chapter 22, Statutes of 2024 PURCHASING AUTHORITY NUMBER: CSL-6120 REPORTING STRUCTURE: 61202000 COA: 5432000 PROGRAM #: 5312 FAIN: LS or N/A By Date (State Library Representative) Grant Award #: CLLS24-71 Date: Invoice #: CLLS24-71-01 PO #: 7638 Payee Name: City of San Bernardino (Legal name of authorized agency to receive, disburse and account for funds*) Complete Address: Street Address, City, State, Zip Code (Warrant will be mailed to this address) Amount Claimed: $65,880 Type of Payment: (Payable Upon Execution of Agreement) ☒ PROGRESS Grantee Name: San Bernardino Public Library ☐ FINAL (Name on Award Letter and Agreement) ☐ IN FULL Project Title: California Library Literacy Services ☐ AUGMENT For Period From: upon execution to end of grant period Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063 Edward R. Erjavek Library Director 555 W. Sixth St., San Bernardino, CA. 92410 9/9/2024 9/10/2024        Packet Page. 324 STATE OF CALIFORNIA – DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE PAYEE DATA RECORD (Required when receiving payment from the State of California in lieu of IRS W-9 or W-7) STD 204 (Rev. 03/2021) Section 1 – Payee Information NAME (This is required. Do not leave this line blank. Must match the payee’s federal tax return) BUSINESS NAME, DBA NAME or DISREGARDED SINGLE MEMBER LLC NAME (If different from above) MAILING ADDRESS (number, street, apt. or suite no.) (See instructions on Page 2) CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE E-MAIL ADDRESS Section 2 – Entity Type Check one (1) box only that matches the entity type of the Payee listed in Section 1 above. (See instructions on page 2) CORPORATION (see instructions on page 2)☐ SOLE PROPRIETOR / INDIVIDUAL ☐ MEDICAL (e.g., dentistry, chiropractic, etc.)☐ SINGLE MEMBER LLC Disregarded Entity owned by an individual ☐ PARTNERSHIP ☐ ESTATE OR TRUST ☐ LEGAL (e.g., attorney services) ☐ EXEMPT (e.g., nonprofit) ☐ ALL OTHERS Section 3 – Tax Identification Number Enter your Tax Identification Number (TIN) in the appropriate box. The TIN must match the name given in Section 1 of this form. Do not provide more than one (1) TIN. The TIN is a 9-digit number. Note: Payment will not be processed without a TIN. • • • • • • For Individuals, enter SSN. If you are a Resident Alien, and you do not have and are not eligible to get an SSN, enter your ITIN. Grantor Trusts (such as a Revocable Living Trust while the grantors are alive) may not have a separate FEIN. Those trusts must enter the individual grantor’s SSN. For Sole Proprietor or Single Member LLC (disregarded entity), in which the sole member is an individual, enter SSN (ITIN if applicable) or FEIN (FTB prefers SSN). For Single Member LLC (disregarded entity), in which the sole member is a business entity, enter the owner entity’s FEIN. Do not use the disregarded entity’s FEIN. For all other entities including LLC that is taxed as a corporation or partnership, estates/trusts (with FEINs), enter the entity’s FEIN. Social Security Number (SSN) or Individual Tax Identification Number (ITIN) ___ ___ ___ -___ ___ -___ ___ ___ ___ OR Federal Employer Identification Number (FEIN) ___ ___ -___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ Section 4 – Payee Residency Status (See instructions) ☐ CALIFORNIA RESIDENT – Qualified to do business in California or maintains a permanent place of business in California. ☐ CALIFORNIA NONRESIDENT – Payments to nonresidents for services may be subject to state income tax withholding. ☐No services performed in California ☐Copy of Franchise Tax Board waiver of state withholding is attached. Section 5 – Certification I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information provided on this document is true and correct. Should my residency status change, I will promptly notify the state agency below. NAME OF AUTHORIZED PAYEE REPRESENTATIVE TITLE E-MAIL ADDRESS SIGNATURE DATE TELEPHONE (include area code) Section 6 – Paying State Agency Please return completed form to: STATE AGENCY/DEPARTMENT OFFICE UNIT/SECTION MAILING ADDRESS FAX TELEPHONE (include area code) CITY STATE ZIP CODE E-MAIL ADDRESS Print Form Reset FormDocusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063 CA 900 N Street accounting@library.ca.govSacramento 95814 Ca. State Library Admin/Accounting 916-603-7157        Packet Page. 325 STATE OF CALIFORNIA – DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE PAYEE DATA RECORD (Required when receiving payment from the State of California in lieu of IRS W-9 or W-7) STD 204 (Rev. 03/2021) GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS Type or print the information on the Payee Data Record, STD 204 form. Sign, date, and return to the state agency/department office address shown in Section 6. Prompt return of this fully completed form will prevent delays when processing payments. Information provided in this form will be used by California state agencies/departments to prepare Information Returns (Form1099). NOTE: Completion of this form is optional for Government entities, i.e. federal, state, local, and special districts. A completed Payee Data Record, STD 204 form, is required for all payees (non-governmental entities or individuals) entering into a transaction that may lead to a payment from the state. Each state agency requires a completed, signed, and dated STD 204 on file; therefore, it is possible for you to receive this form from multiple state agencies with which you do business. Payees who do not wish to complete the STD 204 may elect not to do business with the state. If the payee does not complete the STD 204 and the required payee data is not otherwise provided, payment may be reduced for federal and state backup withholding. Amounts reported on Information Returns (Form 1099) are in accordance with the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) and the California Revenue and Taxation Code (R&TC). Section 1 – Payee Information Name – Enter the name that appears on the payee's federal tax return. The name provided shall be the tax liable party and is subject to IRS TIN matching (when applicable). • Sole Proprietor/Individual/Revocable Trusts – enter the name shown on your federal tax return. • Single Member Limited Liability Companies (LLCs) that is disregarded as an entity separate from its owner for federal tax purposes - enter the name of the individual or business entity that is tax liable for the business in section 1. Enter the DBA, LLC name, trade, or fictitious name under Business Name. • Note: for the State of California tax purposes, a Single Member LLC is not disregarded from its owner, even if they may be disregarded at the Federal level. • Partnerships, Estates/Trusts, or Corporations – enter the entity name as shown on the entity’s federal tax return. The name provided in Section 1 must match to the TIN provided in section 3. Enter any DBA, trade, or fictitious business names under Business Name. Business Name – Enter the business name, DBA name, trade or fictitious name, or disregarded LLC name. Mailing Address – The mailing address is the address where the payee will receive information returns. Use form STD 205, Payee Data Record Supplement to provide a remittance address if different from the mailing address for information returns, or make subsequent changes to the remittance address. Section 2 – Entity Type If the Payee in Section 1 is a(n)… THEN Select the Box for… Individual ● Sole Proprietorship ● Grantor (Revocable Living) Trust disregarded for federal tax purposes Sole Proprietor/Individual Limited Liability Company (LLC) owned by an individual and is disregarded for federal tax purposes Single Member LLC-owned by an individual Partnerships ● Limited Liability Partnerships (LLP) ● and, LLC treated as a Partnership Partnerships Estate ● Trust (other than disregarded Grantor Trust) Estate or Trust Corporation that is medical in nature (e.g., medical and healthcare services, physician care, nursery care, dentistry, etc. ● LLC that is to be taxed like a Corporation and is medical in nature Corporation-Medical Corporation that is legal in nature (e.g., services of attorneys, arbitrators, notary publics involving legal or law related matters, etc.) ● LLC that is to be taxed like a Corporation and is legal in nature Corporation-Legal Corporation that qualifies for an Exempt status, including 501(c) 3 and domestic non-profit corporations. Corporation-Exempt Corporation that does not meet the qualifications of any of the other corporation types listed above ● LLC that is to be taxed as a Corporation and does not meet any of the other corporation types listed above Corporation-All Other Section 3 – Tax Identification Number The State of California requires that all parties entering into business transactions that may lead to payment(s) from the state provide their Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN). The TIN is required by R&TC sections 18646 and 18661 to facilitate tax compliance enforcement activities and preparation of Form 1099 and other information returns as required by the IRC section 6109(a) and R&TC section 18662 and its regulations. Section 4 – Payee Residency Status Are you a California resident or nonresident? • A corporation will be defined as a "resident" if it has a permanent place of business in California or is qualified through the Secretary of State to do business in California. • A partnership is considered a resident partnership if it has a permanent place of business in California. • An estate is a resident if the decedent was a California resident at time of death. • A trust is a resident if at least one trustee is a California resident. o For individuals and sole proprietors, the term "resident" includes every individual who is in California for other than a temporary or transitory purpose and any individual domiciled in California who is absent for a temporary or transitory purpose. Generally, an individual who comes to California for a purpose that will extend over a long or indefinite period will be considered a resident. However, an individual who comes to perform a particular contract of short duration will be considered a nonresident. For information on Nonresident Withholding, contact the Franchise Tax Board at the numbers listed below: Withholding Services and Compliance Section: 1-888-792-4900 E-mail address: wscs.gen@ftb.ca.gov For hearing impaired with TDD, call: 1-800-822-6268 Website: www.ftb.ca.gov Section 5 – Certification Provide the name, title, email address, signature, and telephone number of individual completing this form and date completed. In the event that a SSN or ITIN is provided, the individual identified as the tax liable party must certify the form. Note: the signee may differ from the tax liable party in this situation if the signee can provide a power of attorney documented for the individual. Section 6 – Paying State Agency This section must be completed by the state agency/department requesting the STD 204. Privacy Statement Section 7(b) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-579) requires that any federal, state, or local governmental agency, which requests an individual to disclose their social security account number, shall inform that individual whether that disclosure is mandatory or voluntary, by which statutory or other authority such number is solicited, and what uses will be made of it. It is mandatory to furnish the information requested. Federal law requires that payment for which the requested information is not provided is subject to federal backup withholding and state law imposes noncompliance penalties of up to $20,000. You have the right to access records containing your personal information, such as your SSN. To exercise that right, please contact the business services unit or the accounts payable unit of the state agency(ies) with which you transact that business. All questions should be referred to the requesting state agency listed on the bottom front of this form. Docusign Envelope ID: 9E31567D-799D-4175-BC8A-B2FBAAFCB063        Packet Page. 326 2 3 6 1 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Rochelle Clayton, Acting City Manager; Ernesto Salinas, Interim Director Parks, Recreation & Community Services Department:Parks, Recreation & Community Services Subject:Award of the Professional Services Agreement to T&G Global, LLC dba St. Nick’s, in the amount of $192,000 over two years, for the Tree, Lighting and Decorations for Holiday Events. (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Authorize the City Manager or their designee to execute a Professional Services Agreement with T&G Global, LLC dba St. Nick’s, for Tree Rental, Tree Lighting, and Decorations for Court Street Square Park and Parking lots for the Miracle on Court Street Holiday Event for a 2-year rental term; and 2. Authorize City Manager or their designee to conduct all negotiations, signings, and submittals of necessary documents; and 3. Authorize the Director of Finance and Management Services to issue a purchase order of $96,000 annually for FY 24/25 & 25/26. Executive Summary The agreement with T&G Global LLC will ensure the continued success and growth of the Miracle on Court St. event, providing an elevated experience for the community to engage in multiple holiday themed lighting areas and photo memory opportunities. Additionally, securing a two-year rental agreement locks in the cost, resulting in a total savings of $8,753 (5% annual discount). There is no budget impact associated with this item. The Department's FY24/25 Operating Budget has sufficient funds to cover this agreement.        Packet Page. 327 2 3 6 1 Background Since 2022, the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Department has successfully transformed Court St from a parking lot into a stunning holiday oasis. The Miracle on Court St. event has proven to be a highly successful memory making community celebration, running from 14 to 22 days each year. Initially budgeted at $90,000 in its first year, the event saw a modest increase in subsequent years, which allowed the department to enhance the display with larger Christmas items. In the course of the past year the budget for Miracle on Court St. has increased 75% from the prior year. As the event continues to grow, the need for securing a rental agreement for the Holiday tree and lighting has become essential. In August 2024, the department was advised to obtain quotes for Tree, Lighting, and Decorations for all holiday events. An RFQ was submitted, and after a comprehensive evaluation, St. Nick’s was selected. They not only met all the department’s requirements but also provided one of the most competitive quotes. The vendor offers a diverse selection of holiday decorations that foster a warm and welcoming atmosphere for community members from all backgrounds. Discussion This selection will enable the department to maintain the high quality of the Miracle on Court St. event while optimizing costs. The Tree, Lighting and Decoration project was advertised for public bidding on August 1,2024, on PlanetBids. Six sealed bids were received, and opened on August 29,2024, as follows: Bidder Base Bid The Christmas King 92,000.00 St. Nicks 95,386.94 Décor IQ LLC 100,164.75 Dekra-Lite Industries Incorporated 116,070.00 BrightLife Designs 116,250.00 CLIPA, LLC 173,000.00 After a thorough review of the submitted quotes, the staff has decided to proceed with T & G Global, LLC, operating as St. Nick’s. While it is noteworthy that Christmas King provided the lowest quote, their quote presented a limited selection of items, which did not fully meet our requirements. One significant requirement that was not fulfilled was the inclusion of the walkthrough tree, which has been a major attraction for the community. Staff have carefully assessed the quotes, considering both cost and the vendors' ability to provide multi-year options with potential savings. By selecting T&G Global, LLC, the team was able to evaluate the cost benefits of a two-year lease versus a one-year lease. The two-year rental agreement will result in a savings of $8,753 (5% annual discount), with a yearly cost of approximately $96,000.        Packet Page. 328 2 3 6 1 St. Nicks Rental Pricing (without installation)Total 2 Years 3 Years Equipment Rental $87,532.93 $83,156.28 $80,967.96 TOTAL w/Installation $95,386.94 Additionally, T & G Global, LLC offered a more comprehensive range of options, allowing for greater flexibility and better alignment with our needs. Given the importance of variety and quality in our selection process, staff determined that the broader offerings from T & G Global, LLC justified moving forward with their quote, which was the next lowest. This decision aims to ensure that we secure the best value while also meeting the diverse needs of our project. With this vendor, Miracle on Court St. will continue to feature the popular walkthrough tree, along with numerous ornaments that provide participants with delightful photo opportunities. 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals This request aligns with Key Target 3b. Improved Quality of Life – Develop a customer service initiative by providing events that engage city with partners, businesses and residents. Fiscal Impact There is no fiscal impact associated with this item. The Department's FY24/25 Operating Budget has sufficient funds to cover this agreement. Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Authorize the City Manager or their designee to execute a Professional Services Agreement with T&G Global, LLC dba St. Nick’s, for Tree Rental, Tree Lighting, and Decorations for Court Street Square Park and Parking lots for the Miracle on Court Street Holiday Event for a 2-year rental term; and 2. Authorize City Manager or their designee to conduct all negotiations, signings, and submittals of necessary documents; and 3. Authorize the Director of Finance and Management Services to issue a purchase order of $96,000 annually for FY 24/25 & 25/26. Attachments Attachment 1 PSA for Tree, Lighting, and Decoration for Holiday Events Attachment 2 RFQ-F-24-4015 Attachment 3 Vendor Quote        Packet Page. 329 2 3 6 1 Ward: All Wards Synopsis of Previous Council Actions: N/A        Packet Page. 330 1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND T & G GLOBAL LLC, dba ST. NICK’S This Agreement is made and entered into as of November 6, 2024 by and between the City of San Bernardino, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and operating under the laws of the State of California with its principal place of business at Vanir Tower, 290 North D Street, San Bernardino, CA 92401 (“City”), and T & G GOBLA, LLC. dba ST. NICK’S, a LIMITED LIABLILITY CORPORATION with its principal place of business at 6861 WALKER STREET, LA PALMA, CA 90623 (hereinafter referred to as “Consultant”). City and Consultant are hereinafter sometimes referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.” RECITALS A. City is a public agency of the State of California and is in need of professional services for the following project: HOLIDAY LIGHTING, DECORATIONS AND TREE (hereinafter referred to as “the Project”). B. Consultant is duly licensed and has the necessary qualifications to provide such services. C. The Parties desire by this Agreement to establish the terms for City to retain Consultant to provide the services described herein. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: AGREEMENT 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals above are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein by this reference. 2. Services. Consultant shall provide the City with the services described in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit “A.” 3. Professional Practices. All professional services to be provided by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall be provided by personnel identified in their proposal. Consultant warrants that Consultant is familiar with all laws that may affect its performance of this Agreement and shall advise City of any changes in any laws that may affect Consultant’s performance of this Agreement. Consultant further represents that no City employee will provide any services under this Agreement. 4. Compensation. a. Subject to paragraph 4(b) below, the City shall pay for such services in accordance with the Schedule of Charges set forth in Exhibit “A.”        Packet Page. 331 2 b. In no event shall the total amount paid for services rendered by Consultant under this Agreement exceed the sum of $192,000.00. This amount is to cover all related costs, and the City will not pay any additional fees for printing expenses. Consultant may submit invoices to City for approval. Said invoice shall be based on the total of all Consultant’s services which have been completed to City’s sole satisfaction. City shall pay Consultant’s invoice within forty-five (45) days from the date City receives said invoice. The invoice shall describe in detail the services performed and the associated time for completion. Any additional services approved and performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be designated as “Additional Services” and shall identify the number of the authorized change order, where applicable, on all invoices. 5. Additional Work. If changes in the work seem merited by Consultant or the City, and informal consultations with the other party indicate that a change is warranted, it shall be processed in the following manner: a letter outlining the changes shall be forwarded to the City by Consultant with a statement of estimated changes in fee or time schedule. An amendment to this Agreement shall be prepared by the City and executed by both Parties before performance of such services, or the City will not be required to pay for the changes in the scope of work. Such amendment shall not render ineffective or invalidate unaffected portions of this Agreement. a. Adjustments. No retroactive price adjustments will be considered. Additionally, no price increases will be permitted during the first year of this Agreement, unless agreed to by City and Consultant in writing. 6. Term. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and continue through January 31 ,2026, unless the Agreement is previously terminated as provided for herein (“Term”). 7. Maintenance of Records; Audits. a. Records of Consultant’s services relating to this Agreement shall be maintained in accordance with generally recognized accounting principles and shall be made available to City for inspection and/or audit at mutually convenient times for a period of four (4) years from the Effective Date. b. Books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred shall be maintained by Consultant and made available at all reasonable times during the contract period and for four (4) years from the date of final payment under the contract for inspection by City. 8. Time of Performance. Consultant shall perform its services in a prompt and timely manner and shall commence performance upon receipt of written notice from the City to proceed. Consultant shall complete the services required hereunder within Term. 9. Delays in Performance. a. Neither City nor Consultant shall be considered in default of this        Packet Page. 332 3 Agreement for delays in performance caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the non-performing Party. For purposes of this Agreement, such circumstances include a Force Majeure Event. A Force Majeure Event shall mean an event that materially affects the Consultant’s performance and is one or more of the following: (1) Acts of God or other natural disasters occurring at the project site; (2) terrorism or other acts of a public enemy; (3) orders of governmental authorities (including, without limitation, unreasonable and unforeseeable delay in the issuance of permits or approvals by governmental authorities that are required for the services); and (4) pandemics, epidemics or quarantine restrictions. For purposes of this section, “orders of governmental authorities,” includes ordinances, emergency proclamations and orders, rules to protect the public health, welfare and safety. b. Should a Force Majeure Event occur, the non-performing Party shall, within a reasonable time of being prevented from performing, give written notice to the other Party describing the circumstances preventing continued performance and the efforts being made to resume performance of this Agreement. Delays shall not entitle Consultant to any additional compensation regardless of the Party responsible for the delay. c. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City may still terminate this Agreement in accordance with the termination provisions of this Agreement. 10. Compliance with Law. a. Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of the federal, state and local government, including Cal/OSHA requirements. b. If required, Consultant shall assist the City, as requested, in obtaining and maintaining all permits required of Consultant by federal, state and local regulatory agencies. c. If applicable, Consultant is responsible for all costs of clean up and/ or removal of hazardous and toxic substances spilled as a result of his or her services or operations performed under this Agreement. 11. Standard of Care. Consultant’s services will be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional practices and principles and in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions. Consultant’s performance shall conform in all material respects to the requirements of the Scope of Work . 12. Conflicts of Interest. During the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall at all times maintain a duty of loyalty and a fiduciary duty to the City and shall not accept payment from or employment with any person or entity which will constitute a conflict of interest with the City.        Packet Page. 333 4 13. City Business Certificate. Consultant shall, prior to execution of this Agreement, obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement a valid business registration certificate from the City pursuant to Title 5 of the City’s Municipal Code and any and all other licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance, and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required of Consultant to practice his/her profession, skill, or business. 14. Assignment and Subconsultant. Consultant shall not assign, sublet, or transfer this Agreement or any rights under or interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the City, which may be withheld for any reason. Any attempt to so assign or so transfer without such consent shall be void and without legal effect and shall constitute grounds for termination. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement. Nothing contained herein shall prevent Consultant from employing independent associates and subconsultants as Consultant may deem appropriate to assist in the performance of services hereunder. 15. Independent Consultant. Consultant is retained as an independent contractor and is not an employee of City. No employee or agent of Consultant shall become an employee of City. The work to be performed shall be in accordance with the work described in this Agreement, subject to such directions and amendments from City as herein provided. Any personnel performing the work governed by this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant’s exclusive direction and control. Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance under this Agreement and as required by law. Consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation insurance. 16. Insurance. Consultant shall not commence work for the City until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the City it has secured all insurance required under this section. In addition, Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until it has secured all insurance required under this section. a. Additional Insured The City of San Bernardino, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be named as additional insureds on Consultant’s and its subconsultants’ policies of commercial general liability and automobile liability insurance using the endorsements and forms specified herein or exact equivalents. b. Commercial General Liability (i) The Consultant shall take out and maintain, during the performance of all work under this Agreement, in amounts not less than specified herein, Commercial General Liability Insurance, in a form and with insurance companies acceptable to the City.        Packet Page. 334 5 (ii) Coverage for Commercial General Liability insurance shall be at least as broad as the following: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (Occurrence Form CG 00 01) or exact equivalent. (iii) Commercial General Liability Insurance must include coverage for the following: (1) Bodily Injury and Property Damage (2) Personal Injury/Advertising Injury (3) Premises/Operations Liability (4) Products/Completed Operations Liability (5) Aggregate Limits that Apply per Project (6) Explosion, Collapse and Underground (UCX) exclusion deleted (7) Contractual Liability with respect to this Contract (8) Broad Form Property Damage (9) Independent Consultants Coverage (iv) The policy shall contain no endorsements or provisions limiting coverage for (1) contractual liability; (2) cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another; (3) products/completed operations liability; or (4) contain any other exclusion contrary to the Agreement. (v) The policy shall give City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents, and City-designated volunteers additional insured status using ISO endorsement forms CG 20 10 10 01 and 20 37 10 01, or endorsements providing the exact same coverage. (vi) The general liability program may utilize either deductibles or provide coverage excess of a self-insured retention, subject to written approval by the City, and provided that such deductibles shall not apply to the City as an additional insured. c. Automobile Liability (i) At all times during the performance of the work under this Agreement, the Consultant shall maintain Automobile Liability Insurance for bodily injury and property damage including coverage for owned, non-owned and hired vehicles, in a form and with insurance companies acceptable to the City. (ii) Coverage for automobile liability insurance shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 00 01 covering automobile liability (Coverage Symbol 1, any auto).        Packet Page. 335 6 (iii) The policy shall give City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents and City designated volunteers additional insured status. (iv) Subject to written approval by the City, the automobile liability program may utilize deductibles, provided that such deductibles shall not apply to the City as an additional insured, but not a self-insured retention. d. Workers’ Compensation/Employer’s Liability (i) Consultant certifies that he/she is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self -insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and he/she will comply with such provisions before commencing work under this Agreement. (ii) To the extent Consultant has employees at any time during the term of this Agreement, at all times during the performance of the work under this Agreement, the Consultant shall maintain full compensation insurance for all persons employed directly by him/her to carry out the work contemplated under this Agreement, all in accordance with the “Workers’ Compensation and Insurance Act,” Division IV of the Labor Code of the State of California and any acts amendatory thereof, and Employer’s Liability Coverage in amounts indicated herein. Consultant shall require all subconsultants to obtain and maintain, for the period required by this Agreement, workers’ compensation coverage of the same type and limits as specified in this section. e. Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) At all times during the performance of the work under this Agreement the Consultant shall maintain professional liability or Errors and Omissions insurance appropriate to its profession, in a form and with insurance companies acceptable to the City and in an amount indicated herein. This insurance shall be endorsed to include contractual liability applicable to this Agreement and shall be written on a policy form coverage specifically designed to protect against acts, errors or omissions of the Consultant. “Covered Professional Services” as designated in the policy must specifically include work performed under this Agreement. The policy must “pay on behalf of” the insured and must include a provision establishing the insurer's duty to defend. f. Privacy/Network Security (Cyber) At all times during the performance of the work under this Agreement, the Consultant shall maintain privacy/network security insurance for: (1) privacy breaches, (2) system breaches, (3) denial or loss of service, and the (4) introduction, implantation or spread of malicious software code, in a form and with insurance companies acceptable to the City.        Packet Page. 336 7 At all times during the performance of the work under this Agreement, the Consultant shall maintain Aviation and/or Drone Liability insurance for bodily injury and property damage, in a form and with insurance companies acceptable to the City. g. Minimum Policy Limits Required (i) The following insurance limits are required for the Agreement: Combined Single Limit Commercial General Liability $2,000,000 per occurrence/$4,000,000 aggregate for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage Employer’s Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence Professional Liability $1,000,000 per claim and aggregate (errors and omissions) Cyber Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence and aggregate i. Evidence Required Prior to execution of the Agreement, the Consultant shall file with the City evidence of insurance from an insurer or insurers certifying to the coverage of all insurance required herein. Such evidence shall include original copies of the ISO CG 00 01 (or insurer’s equivalent) signed by the insurer’s representative and Certificate of Insurance (Acord Form 25-S or equivalent), together with required endorsements. All evidence of insurance shall be signed by a properly authorized officer, agent, or qualified representative of the insurer and shall certify the names of the insured, any additional insureds, where appropriate, the type and amount of the insurance, the location and operations to which the insurance applies, and the expiration date of such insurance. j. Policy Provisions Required (i) Consultant shall provide the City at least thirty (30) days prior written notice of cancellation of any policy required by this Agreement, except that the Consultant shall provide at least ten (10) days prior written notice of cancellation of any such policy due to non-payment of the premium. If any of the required coverage is cancelled or expires during the term of this Agreement, the Consultant shall deliver renewal certificate(s) including the General Liability Additional Insured Endorsement to the City at least ten (10) days prior to the effective date of cancellation or expiration.        Packet Page. 337 8 (ii) The Commercial General Liability Policy and Automobile Policy shall each contain a provision stating that Consultant’s policy is primary insurance and that any insurance, self-insurance or other coverage maintained by the City or any named insureds shall not be called upon to contribute to any loss. (iii) The retroactive date (if any) of each policy is to be no later than the effective date of this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain such coverage continuously for a period of at least three years after the completion of the work under this Agreement. Consultant shall purchase a one (1) year extended reporting period A) if the retroactive date is advanced past the effective date of this Agreement; B) if the policy is cancelled or not renewed; or C) if the policy is replaced by another claims-made policy with a retroactive date subsequent to the effective date of this Agreement. (iv) All required insurance coverages, except for the professional liability coverage, shall contain or be endorsed to provide waiver of subrogation in favor of the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against City, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants. (v) The limits set forth herein shall apply separately to each insured against whom claims are made or suits are brought, except with respect to the limits of liability. Further the limits set forth herein shall not be construed to relieve the Consultant from liability in excess of such coverage, nor shall it limit the Consultant’s indemnification obligations to the City and shall not preclude the City from taking such other actions available to the City under other provisions of the Agreement or law. k. Qualifying Insurers (i) All policies required shall be issued by acceptable insurance companies, as determined by the City, which satisfy the following minimum requirements: (1) Each such policy shall be from a company or companies with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII and admitted to transact in the business of insurance in the State of California, or otherwise allowed to place insurance through surplus line brokers under applicable provisions of the California Insurance Code or any federal law. l Additional Insurance Provisions (i) The foregoing requirements as to the types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained by Consultant, and any approval of said insurance by the City, is not intended to and shall not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations otherwise assumed by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the provisions concerning indemnification.        Packet Page. 338 9 (ii) If at any time during the life of the Agreement, any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, City has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant or City will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments. In the alternative, City may cancel this Agreement. (iii) The City may require the Consultant to provide complete copies of all insurance policies in effect for the duration of the Project. (iv) Neither the City nor the City Council, nor any member of the City Council, nor any of the officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers shall be personally responsible for any liability arising under or by virtue of this Agreement. m. Subconsultant Insurance Requirements. Consultant shall not allow any subcontractors or subconsultants to commence work on any subcontract until they have provided evidence satisfactory to the City that they have secured all insurance required under this section. Policies of commercial general liability insurance provided by such subcontractors or subconsultants shall be endorsed to name the City as an additional insured using ISO form CG 20 38 04 13 or an endorsement providing the exact same coverage. If requested by Consultant, City may approve different scopes or minimum limits of insurance for particular subcontractors or subconsultants. 17. Indemnification. a. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall defend (with counsel reasonably approved by the City), indemnify and hold the City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents, and authorized volunteers free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, suits, actions, proceedings, costs, expenses, liability, judgments, awards, decrees, settlements, loss, damage or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, (collectively, “Claims”) in any manner arising out of, pertaining to, or incident to any alleged acts, errors or omissions, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, subcontractors, consultants or agents in connection with the performance of the Consultant’s services, the Project, or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all damages, expert witness fees, attorneys’ fees and other related costs and expenses. This indemnification clause excludes Claims arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the City, the City Council, members of the City Council, its employees, or authorized volunteers. Consultant’s indemnification obligation shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. b. If Consultant’s obligation to defend, indemnify, and/or hold harmless arises out of Consultant’s performance as a “design professional” (as that term is defined under Civil Code section 2782.8), then, and only to the extent required by Civil Code section 2782.8, which is fully incorporated herein, Consultant’s indemnification obligation shall be limited to the extent which the Claims arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the        Packet Page. 339 10 negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant in the performance of the services or this Agreement, and, upon Consultant obtaining a final adjudication by a court of competent jurisdiction, Consultant’s liability for such claim, including the cost to defend, shall not exceed the Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault. 18. California Labor Code Requirements. Consultant is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. and 1770 et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000, et seq., ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on certain “public works” and “maintenance” projects. If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable “public works” or “maintenance” project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, Consultant agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws, if applicable. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claims, liabilities, costs, penalties or interest arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws. It shall be mandatory upon the Consultant and all subcontractors to comply with all California Labor Code provisions, which include but are not limited to prevailing wages (Labor Code Sections 1771, 1774 and 1775), employment of apprentices (Labor Code Section 1777.5), certified payroll records (Labor Code Sections 1771.4 and 1776), hours of labor (Labor Code Sections 1813 and 1815) and debarment of contractors and subcontractors (Labor Code Section 1777.1). If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable “public works” or “maintenance” project, then pursuant to Labor Code Sections 1725.5 and 1771.1, the Consultant and all subconsultants performing such Services must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations. Consultant shall maintain registration for the duration of the Project and require the same of any subconsultants, as applicable. This Project may also be subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations. It shall be Consultant’s sole responsibility to comply with all applicable registration and labor compliance requirements. 19. Verification of Employment Eligibility. By executing this Agreement, Consultant verifies that it fully complies with all requirements and restrictions of state and federal law respecting the employment of undocumented aliens, including, but not limited to, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, as may be amended from time to time, and shall require all subconsultants and sub -subconsultants to comply with the same. 20. Laws and Venue. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. If any action is brought to interpret or enforce any term of this Agreement, the action shall be brought in a state or federal court situated in the County of San Bernardino, State of California. 21. Termination or Abandonment        Packet Page. 340 11 a. City has the right to terminate or abandon any portion or all of the work under this Agreement by giving ten (10) calendar days’ written notice to Consultant. In such event, City shall be immediately given title and possession to all original field notes, drawings and specifications, written reports and other documents produced or developed for that portion of the work completed and/or being abandoned. City shall pay Consultant the reasonable value of services rendered for any portion of the work completed prior to termination. If said termination occurs prior to completion of any task for the Project for which a payment request has not been received, the charge for services performed during such task shall be the reasonable value of such services, based on an amount mutually agreed to by City and Consultant of the portion of such task completed but not paid prior to said termination. City shall not be liable for any costs other than the charges or portions thereof which are specified herein. Consultant shall not be entitled to payment for unperformed services, and shall not be entitled to damages or compensation for termination of work. b. Consultant may terminate its obligation to provide further services under this Agreement upon thirty (30) calendar days’ written notice to City only in the event of substantial failure by City to perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement through no fault of Consultant. 22. Attorneys’ Fees. In the event that litigation is brought by any Party in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover from the opposing Party all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the prevailing Party in the exercise of any of its rights or remedies hereunder or the enforcement of any of the terms, conditions, or provisions hereof. The costs, salary, and expenses of the City Attorney’s Office in enforcing this Agreement on behalf of the City shall be considered as “attorneys’ fees” for the purposes of this Agreement. 23. Responsibility for Errors. Consultant shall be responsible for its work and results under this Agreement. Consultant, when requested, shall furnish clarification and/or explanation as may be required by the City’s representative, regarding any services rendered under this Agreement at no additional cost to City. In the event that an error or omission attributable to Consultant’s professional services occurs, Consultant shall, at no cost to City, provide all other services necessary to rectify and correct the matter to the sole satisfaction of the City and to participate in any meeting required with regard to the correction. 24. Prohibited Employment. Consultant shall not employ any current employee of City to perform the work under this Agreement while this Agreement is in effect. 25. Costs. Each Party shall bear its own costs and fees incurred in the preparation and negotiation of this Agreement and in the performance of its obligations hereunder except as expressly provided herein. 26. Documents. Except as otherwise provided in “Termination or Abandonment,” above, all original field notes, written reports, Drawings and Specifications and other documents, produced or developed for the Project shall, upon        Packet Page. 341 12 payment in full for the services described in this Agreement, be furnished to and become the property of the City. 27. Organization. Consultant shall assign Daniel Christenson as Project Manager. The Project Manager shall not be removed from the Project or reassigned without the prior written consent of the City. 28. Limitation of Agreement. This Agreement is limited to and includes only the work included in the Project described above. 29. Notice. Any notice or instrument required to be given or delivered by this Agreement may be given or delivered by depositing the same in any United States Post Office, certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed to the following addresses and shall be effective upon receipt thereof: CITY: City of San Bernardino Vanir Tower, 290 North D Street San Bernardino, CA 92401 Attn: Rochelle Clayton Acting City Manager With Copy To: City of San Bernardino Vanir Tower, 290 North D Street San Bernardino, CA 92401 Attn: City Attorney CONSULTANT: T&G Global, LLC 6861 Walker Street La Palma, CA 90621 Attn: Daniel Christenson Sales Director 30. Third Party Rights. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to give any rights or benefits to anyone other than the City and the Consultant. 31. Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and that it shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, age or other interests protected by the State or Federal Constitutions. Such non-discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination. 32. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including Exhibit “A,” represents the entire understanding of City and Consultant as to those matters contained herein, and supersedes and cancels any prior or contemporaneous oral or written understanding, promises or representations with respect to those matters covered hereunder. Each Party acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements have been made by any person which are not incorporated herein, and that any other agreements shall be void. This is an integrated Agreement.        Packet Page. 342 13 33. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable for any reason, such determination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or of the offending provision in any other circumstance, and the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 34. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the successors in interest, executors, administrators and assigns of each Party to this Agreement. However, Consultant shall not assign or transfer by operation of law or otherwise any or all of its rights, burdens, duties or obligations without the prior written consent of City. Any attempted assignment without such consent shall be invalid and void. 35. Non-Waiver. The delay or failure of either Party at any time to require performance or compliance by the other Party of any of its obligations or agreements shall in no way be deemed a waiver of those rights to require such performance or compliance. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the Party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. The waiver of any right or remedy with respect to any occurrence or event shall not be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy with respect to any other occurrence or event, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver. 36. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 37. Headings. Paragraphs and subparagraph headings contained in this Agreement are included solely for convenience and are not intended to modify, explain, or to be a full or accurate description of the content thereof and shall not in any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement. 38. Amendments. Only a writing executed by all of the Parties hereto or their respective successors and assigns may amend this Agreement. 39. City’s Right to Employ Other Consultants. City reserves its right to employ other consultants, including engineers, in connection with this Project or other projects. 40. Prohibited Interests. Consultant maintains and warrants that it has neither employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Consultant warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. For the term of this Agreement, no official, officer or employee of City, during the term of his or her service with City, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom.        Packet Page. 343 14 41. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. All counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute one single Agreement. 42. Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the Parties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said Parties and that by doing so, the Parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement. 43. Electronic Signature. Each Party acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement may be executed by electronic or digital signature, which shall be considered as an original signature for all purposes and shall have the same force and effect as an original signature. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]        Packet Page. 344 15 SIGNATURE PAGE FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND T&G GLOBAL LLC, DBA ST. NICK’S IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CONSULTANT APPROVED BY: Rochelle Clayton Acting City Manager ATTESTED BY: Signature Name Genoveva Rocha, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Title Best Best & Krieger LLP City Attorney        Packet Page. 345 16 EXHIBIT A        Packet Page. 346 17 Exhibit B Performance CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO 2024/ 2025 CONTRACT WALKTHROUGH/ PHOTO OP INSTALLATION A) Nature of and Limitations on Services City of San Bernardino (“Client”) hereby engages T&G Global, LLC (T&G) d/b/a St. Nick’s Christmas Lighting & Décor (St. Nick’s) to install a total of 5 – 12FT Walkthroughs/ Photo Op. T&G has not undertaken nor is T&G required to make any independent investigation or verification of the information (either written or oral) supplied by the Client. As such, T&G has relied on documents and other information furnished to us by the Client and personnel in developing its scope of work detailed in the Proposal. B) General Description of Services and Limitations on Liability Installation of 7 Photo Ops. (1) 34FT walkthrough Tree, (1) 12FT Walkthrough Ornament, (1) 8FT Photo Frame, (1) 12FT Walkthrough Gift Box, (1) 12FT Walkthrough Star, (1) 16FT Walkthrough Star, (1) 20FT Christmas Tree. ADDENDUM A below. It is agreed that T&G will not be liable to the Client, or to anyone who may claim any right due to its relationship with the Client, for any acts or omissions or alleged acts or omissions in the performance of services by us to or for the Client, except where T&G’s acts or omissions are due to T&G’s willful misconduct or gross negligence. T&G shall not be responsible for losses suffered by Client or other persons on the Client’s property for inconvenience, personal discomfort, or temporary loss of use or enjoyment of the Property as a result of Client’s decision to engage T&G’s services hereunder, or for damages to person or property resulting directly or indirectly from causes beyond T&G’s control. In addition, and without limiting the foregoing, the Client will hold T&G and its shareholders, officers, directors and employees (collectively, "T&G"), free and harmless from and shall defend and indemnify T&G from any and all liabilities, damages, losses, judgments, claims, actions and lawsuits arising out of or connected in any way with services rendered by T&G to the Client. Any liability of T&G, including liability for damages, costs, and/or expenses of any kind, shall not exceed the compensation received by T&G under this Contract during the year in question. This obligation will survive the        Packet Page. 347 18 termination of T&G’s contract with the Client and will be binding on the Client's successors and assignors. C) Scope for Each Installation, Installation Dates, Client’s Responsibilities Scope of Installation: T&G will install, decorate, remove the following decorations: See ADDENDUM A. Installation Date: T&G will do its best to complete the installation on the date City of San Bernardino chooses: However, installations may be delayed for reasons beyond T&G’s control, including but not limited to denial of proper access to installation spaces; electrical deficiencies at the project site; and, unsafe, inclement weather for outdoor installations. Installation dates are based upon a reservation system, especially during peak season. It is recommended that Client confirm the start dates as soon as possible to secure the dates. Installation Methods: T&G will likely use bolts, cables, staples, hooks, screws, glue or similar devices that are commonly used in installations. T&G will use reasonable efforts to avoid damage to Client’s property, but T&G will not be responsible for any damage resulting from the reasonable use of these attachment devices or for the removal of them. For areas that do not have power receptacles, it is the Client’s responsibility to provide the electrical source for the displays. Client’s Responsibilities At the time each installation is completed, the Client shall conduct a visible inspection to determine that the job was completed in accordance to the agreed upon work assignment. Should the Client discover any problems, Client shall inform T&G within 24 hours. T&G will return to the job site and correct any agreed upon problem. After 24 hours, all installation services will be deemed as performed in an acceptable manner.        Packet Page. 348 19 D) Fee Schedule Detailed below are the fees for our services. Please initial in the space below. Service Fees Amount Initials 2024/2025 (Rental of 5 12FT Walkthroughs/ Photo Op): 1. See addendum A for installation services 2. Certificate of Insurance $95,386.94 $0 [ ] [ ] Deposits: A 50% deposit is required for each year of the contract, and the deposits paid will be reduced from the amounts owned by the Client under this contract. The 2023 deposit is required upon signing the contract. Additional Work: In the event the Client desires to have additional work performed, the Client should request a written quote for additional charges for the additional work. The client agrees to pay for the agreed additional services on the payment terms above. Additional Fees & Expenses: In addition to the above fees for each review, the following fees and expenses may occur: • Service Call: Faulty electrical outlets, test reset switches or GFIs or main breaker trips will be subject to a service call fee as they can be simply reset on Client’s end and will be subject to a $250 service trip charge. • Meetings: For each installation, T&G will conduct an Entry Meeting and an Exit Meeting. In addition, T&G personnel may initiate meetings throughout the installation in order to discuss specific topics or issues that may arise. The above stated fees include the following meetings: Entry Meeting (2-4 hours); Exit Meeting (1 hour); and discussions during the onsite portion of the review that are initiated by T&G personnel. If additional time is warranted for the Entry Meeting or the Exit Meeting, or if the Client’s personnel initiate additional meetings or discussions, T&G will be compensated for the additional time. Compensation will be based on the following rates: o T&G Management = $125 / hour. o T&G Staff Personnel (Crew Chief, Installers) = $65 / hour. • Time Required Outside of Installation: If there are instances, in which T&G personnel are required to be on the assignment and T&G personnel are not allowed to perform the installation services due to the Client not providing access to the installation areas or requiring that work not be performed due the needs of the Client, then an hourly fee will be assessed to the Client for their time (i.e. waiting time or travel time). Compensation will be based on the following rates: o T&G Management = $100 /hour.        Packet Page. 349 20 o T&G Staff Personnel (Crew Chief, Installers) = $50 /hour. • Insurance Coverage & Bonds Requested by Client: Should the client request any changes to T&G’s insurance coverage and/or bonds (subrogation, added loss payee, performance bond, payment bond), then the cost of those items will be passed on to the client at cost plus 10%, however, a minimum fee of $350 will be charged. • Billings: Final billings will be submitted upon the completion of each installation. Reasonable expenses associated with each service will also be charged and may include such items as: copying; binding; postage; travel; and parking. All invoices are due upon presentation. Any outstanding amount more than thirty (30) days will be charged a 1.5% fee per month until paid. Attorney fees associated with the collection of any past due amount will be added to the amount owed by the bank. E) Contract Commencement, Expiration and Option to Extend 1. Commencement: This engagement letter commences with the signing of this engagement letter. 2. Expiration: This contract is effective until January 31, 2025. F) Limited Warranty T&G provides a one- year limited warranty for lights and equipment. For problems that are caused by the Client or outside the fault of the Client, the Client will be charged for damaged product and billed our normal retail price for replacement, and for services related thereto, including damages caused by weather conditions, gardeners, children, vandals or similar. Faulty electrical outlets, test reset switches or GFIs or main breaker trips will be subject to a service call fee – please refer to the Billing section of this contract. LED technology is changing rapidly. LEDS are made in lots and sorted into bins base on wavelength ranges that achieve colors. Products ordered at different times may not have the same color appearance due to variations. G) Miscellaneous Promotional Activities: T&G reserves the right to photograph and use all photos taken in any and all advertising materials for future projects. Any commercial photographic images of the Christmas décor or event lighting by anyone other than T&G must contain a prominent reference to St. Nick’s. Hiring Employees: The Client and T&G agree that if the Client hires an employee, officer or other staff (“employee”) of T&G it will pay T&G an amount equal to 40% of the first years’ salary and bonus paid to the employee. This provision is effective during the term of this agreement and for one year after its expiration or termination. Payment will be due on the date the employee starts work and any additional payment (i.e. bonus, salary increase, or similar payment) will be paid whenever it is received by the employee. In addition, and in order to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest, the Client will not conduct any employment interview, make any offer of employment, or indicate in any way to an employee that the Client may wish to hire them until after each year’s installation. Confidentiality: T&G and the Client agree to the following: 1) Neither party shall use or disclose to any person, except its respective employees, independent contractors, and other representatives having a specific need to know in        Packet Page. 350 21 performance of their work or as permitted by law, the terms of this Agreement or any proprietary or confidential Information of one party disclosed to the other under this Agreement. For the purpose of this Agreement, proprietary or Confidential Information shall not include information which is or becomes: a) part of the public domain without violation of this Agreement; b) known by the receiving party prior to disclosure by the disclosing party; c) rightfully received by the receiving party from a third party having the right to disclose such information; or, d) developed by the receiving party independent of the disclosing party's otherwise proprietary or Confidential Information. 2) T&G will not provide to third parties for marketing purposes, Confidential Information delivered to it under this Agreement except as authorized by the Client. This Agreement does not apply to disclosures of nonpublic personal information in the following instances: a) To assist in protecting against or preventing actual or potential fraud or unauthorized transactions; and, b) To comply with Federal, State, or local laws, rules and other applicable legal requirements; to comply with a properly authorized civil, criminal or regulatory investigation, or subpoena or summons by Federal, State or local authorities; or to respond to judicial process or government regulatory authority having jurisdiction over a financial institution for examination, compliance or other purposes as authorized by law. 3) T&G has implemented and will maintain an Information Security Program to protect nonpublic personal information provided to T&G, and the program includes administrative, technical, and physical safeguards. The information security measures are designed to: a) Protect the security and confidentiality of client confidential information; b) Protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such client information; c) Protect against unauthorized access to or use of such client records and information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to the Client; d) Provide response programs to address incidents of unauthorized access to the Client’s information; and, e) Ensure the proper disposal of client information. 4) T&G will monitor compliance with these safeguards as appropriate. 5) Upon termination of this Agreement, T&G may retain, in a secured manner, copies of data required for archival or audit purposes, or as required by law. Right to Refuse Service: St. Nick’s retains the right to refuse service for reasons inconsistent with public policy. Reservation of Intellectual Property: Intellectual Property includes (but is not limited to) installation designs, artistic renderings, unique installation methods, procedures, and processes created by and utilized by T&G. T&G’s Intellectual Property is not licensed under this Agreement and is retained by T&G. Any use of T&G’s Intellectual Property by the Client is forbidden. Should the Client use T&G’s intellectual property, then the Client will pay T&G the amount of the fees associated with the intellectual property.        Packet Page. 351 22 Client Contact Person: The Client will provide the names, email addresses, office telephone numbers, and cell phone numbers of the Primary Contact Person and a Back-up Contact Person when the signed contract is returned to T&G. In addition, the Client will inform T&G as soon as possible of many changes to the contract persons. Material Change in the Physical Installation Locations and Other Significant Changes to Performing work under this contract: The Contact Person will be responsible for informing us of any material change to the installation areas, new installation locations, altered areas/locations, and/or structural changes (collectively “material change”) related to the areas that T&G is to perform its installations. This is to ensure that T&G properly plans and manages the installations. Should any material change occur, then the scope of the services may need to be changed and so may the cost. Therefore, once T&G has been informed of (or T&G discovers) a material change, T&G will then review the scope and if a change in scope is needed, T&G will then inform the Contact Person so that any changes can be approved. Dispute Resolution: • MEDIATION – In the unlikely event that a dispute arises out of this engagement and it cannot be settled through negotiations, Client and T&G agree to try in good faith to settle the dispute by non-binding mediation administered by the American Arbitration Association under its mediation rules before resorting to litigation. Both parties shall share mediation costs equally. • JURY TRIAL – In the unlikely event that differences concerning T&G’s services or fees arise between us that are not resolved by mutual agreement or mediation, Client and T&G agree to waive a trial by jury to facilitate judicial resolution and save the time and expense of both parties. • ATTORNEY’S FEES – In any dispute between the parties arising out of this agreement, the prevailing party shall have the right to collect from the other party its reasonable costs and necessary disbursements and attorneys' fees incurred in enforcing this agreement. Enforcement: If any of the provisions of this Contract shall be held to be indefinite, invalid, illegal or otherwise unenforceable, in whole or in part, for any reason, by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the provisions of this Contract shall continue in full force and effect and shall be construed as if such indefinite, invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had not been contained herein. Consistency: In the event of any inconsistency between the Proposal and these Terms and Conditions, these Terms and Conditions will control. Limited Offer: If this Proposal is not signed and accepted within 30 days, this proposal must be reissued by T&G. COVID-19: Should the client be closed due to a public safety order between the scheduled installation and removal of the holiday decorations or should St. Nick’s not be able to perform the installation due to a public safety order, then any money deposited will be applied to future work. Once the decorations are installed, then the normal contract provisions should be in force. Should the removal of the decorations be delayed due to a public safety order, then the        Packet Page. 352 23 decorations will be removed once the public safety order in no longer in effect and the client schedules their removal with St. Nick’s. The foregoing has been confirmed and agreed by: T&G Global, LLC 6861 Walker Street La Palma, CA 90621 City of San Bernardino 201 N. E Street San Bernardino, CA 92401        Packet Page. 353 Bid Detail Tree, Lighting, and Decorations for Holiday Event RFQ F-24-40… Project Title Tree, Lighting, and Decorations for Holiday Event Invitation #RFQ F-24-4015 Bid Posting Date 08/01/2024 12:55 PM (PDT) Project Stage Closed Bid Due Date 08/29/2024 3:00 PM (PDT) Response Format Electronic Project Type RFQ (Request for Quote) Response Types Line Items Cost File Response File General Attachment Type of Award Lump Sum Categories 238210 - Electrical Contractors and Other Wiring Installation Contractors 327113 - Porcelain Electrical Supply Manufacturing 335110 - Electric Lamp Bulb and Part Manufacturing 335121 - Residential Electric Lighting Fixture Manufacturing 335122 - Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional Electric Lighting Fixture Manufacturing 335129 - Other Lighting Equipment Manufacturing 423620 - Electrical and Electronic Appliance, Television, and Radio Set Merchant Wholesalers 713110 - Amusement and Theme Parks 713120 - Amusement Arcades 713990 - All Other Amusement and Recreation Industries License Requirements Department Finance Address 290 North "D" Street San Bernardino, California 92401 County San Bernardino Bid Valid Liquidated Damages Estimated Bid Value Start/Delivery Date Project Duration        Packet Page. 354 Pre-Bid Meeting Information Online Q&A Contact Information Description Pre-Bid Meeting Yes - Not Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting Date 08/14/2024 11:00 AM (PDT) Pre-Bid Meeting Location Court Street Square 349 N E Street San Bernardino, CA 92401. Online Q&A Yes Q&A Deadline 08/15/2024 3:00 PM (PDT) Contact Info Jennifer Broadnax 909-384-5242 x3241 broadnax_je@sbcity.org Bids to Owner's Agent Scope of Services The City of San Bernardino Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department would like to obtain professional service from qualied bidder(s) for the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department for Rental of Holiday Tree and Holiday Lighting. See bid documents for the full specications. Other Details Notes Special Notices Local Programs & Policies        Packet Page. 355 A l l r e n d e r i n g a r t w o r k , p h o t o s , a n d d e s i g n c o n c e p t s a r e p r o p e r t y o f : S T -N I C K S .C O M P R O P O S A L P R E S E N T E D B Y : L U I S M O N T A Ñ E Z - A C C O U N T E X E C U T I V E 2 0 2 4 H O L I D A Y S E A S O N P R E P A R E D F O R : C I T Y O F S A N B E R N A R D I N O P R O P O S A L        Packet Page. 356 We appreciate the trust you will be placing in St. Nick’s should you award us the contract. Rest assured we have invested a great deal of time into planning and execution of our designs. Our team includes structural engineers, sound technicians, and our cadre of experts to ensure that our unique plans can be implemented within your budget and time frames. St. Nick’s has high standards for quality products and energy-efficient LED lighting. We strive hard to ensure that the continuing of St. Nick’s service will be as easy as possible for the staff. In fact, we truly hope that by moving beyond just lights and decorations, we will make your jobs easier and help you continue to shine time after time. S T -N I C K S .C O M St. Nick’s is excited to submit this holiday décor proposal that is assured to brighten your property. We appreciate the opportunity to partner with you this season. Other amazing clients, such as City of West Hollywood, The Pike Outlets, the City of Carson, The Music Center in Downtown Los Angeles, and many others have trusted St. Nick’s with their special lighting projects There are many good reasons why our clients continue to utilize our services year after year, which not only includes our innovation capabilities but also our nod to professionalism. We appreciate the complexities and intricacies involved with large scale projects. We are confident that our technical abilities combined with our focused attention to detail will meet and exceed all your expectations. Our design plan includes many visual delights as you’ll see flipping through the pages of this proposal. Luis Montañez, Account Executive luis@st-nicks.com Thank you,Luis Mo ntañez        Packet Page. 357 S T -N I C K S .C O M Nicholas Adams Founder and Legal Compliance Wade Francis Chief Financial Officer Brenda Sheridan Director of Operations Daniel Christenson Director of Sales Luis Montanez Account Executive Stephanie Escobar Creative Director Carlos Vasquez Sr. Installer & Project Manager Alonso Salazar Sr. Installer & Project Manager COMPANY PROFILE Founded 1998 business, dba St. Nick’s (25 years) T&G Global, LLC (CA) Tax ID #68-0636192 14 full-time employees, 30-45 seasonal staff B-General Building Contractor #990427 Certified Small Business Supplier #1626660 County of Los Angles Small Business Enterprise (LSBE) Vendor #16942501 Business Address: 6861 Walker Street, La Palma, CA 90623 Telephone: (562) 438-0017 Fax: (562) 437-4242 Contact Name: Luis Montanez, Account Executive Website: www.St-Nicks.com        Packet Page. 358 S T -N I C K S .C O M 3 4 F T F R A M E T R E E W I T H L E D T O P P E R . F U L L Y D E C O R A T E D W I T H O V E R 1 ,2 0 0 O R N A M E N T S A N D F L O R A L S .(S A M E T R E E A S L A S T Y E A R ) Walkthrough X Mas TreeWalkthrough X Mas Tree        Packet Page. 359 1 2 ' R E D A N D W H I T E S N O W F L A K E W I T H R E D P V C A N D T W I N K L I N G L I G H T S I N S I D E T H E O R N A M E N T S T -N I C K S .C O M WalkthroughOrnamentWalkthroughOrnament        Packet Page. 360 S T -N I C K S .C O M 6 ' M I S T L E T O E D I S P L A Y W / R E D B O W A N D W H I T E B E R R I E S 6FT Mistletoe6FT Mistletoe        Packet Page. 361 1 4 ' L E D W H I T E A N D R E D W A L K T H R O U G H C A N D Y C A N E S .S T -N I C K S .C O M 14FT Walkthrough Candy Canes14FT Walkthrough Candy Canes       Packet Page. 362 S T -N I C K S .C O M 1 2 ' R E D C H R I S T M A S O R N A M E N T , L E D W A R M W H I T E L I G H T S , R E D P V C M E S H R E D B E N C H . 12FT Sit Down Ornament12FT Sit Down Ornament       Packet Page. 363 S T -N I C K S .C O M 1 4 ' W A L K T H R O U G H L E D W R E A T H A R C H W I T H M U L T I C O L O R O R N A M E N T S . 14FT Wreath Arch14FT Wreath Arch       Packet Page. 364 S T -N I C K S .C O M 1 2 ' W A L K T H R O U G H G I F T B O X W I T H W A R M W H I T E , G R E E N A N D B L U E L E D L I G H T S 12FTWalkthrough Giftbox 12FTWalkthrough Giftbox        Packet Page. 365 L E D L I G H T E D P H O T O O P W I T H E L F P E R F E C T P H O T O S W I T H G U E S T S T -N I C K S .C O M Elf Lighted Bench Photo Op Elf Lighted Bench Photo Op        Packet Page. 366 S T -N I C K S .C O M R E D L E D S A N T A M A I L B O X W I T H S L O T F O R L E T T E R S        Packet Page. 367 S T -N I C K S .C O M Rental Pricing        Packet Page. 368 Purpose of Proposal: Rental of Commercial Holiday Decoration Contact: Jennifer Broadnax (Procurement Contract Specialist, Purchasing Division) Email: purchasing@sbcity.org Phone: 909.384.5233 ext 5120 Project Date: 11/2024 - 12/02/2024 Installation Address: Court Street Square 349 N. E. Street, San Bernardino, CA 92401 All material appearing on the St. Nick’s Christmas Lighting & Décor Proposal (“content”) is protected by copyright under U.S. Copyright laws and is the property of St. Nick’s Christmas Lighting & Décor. You may not copy, reproduce, distribute, publish, display, perform, modify, create derivative works, transmit, or in any way exploit any such content, nor may you distribute any part of this content over any network, including a local area network, sell or offer it for sale, or use such content to construct any kind of database, or to show a preferred layout for presenting creative concepts. You may not alter or remove any copyright or other notice from copies of the content on St. Nick’s Christmas Lighting & Décor Proposal. For questions or concerns please contact stephanie@st-nicks.com This quote is valid for 30 days. To execute installation, please initial each additional option and sign below. Final agreement to follow. ________________________________________ Authorized Signer ________________________________________ Printed Name ____________ Date Luis Montañez, Account Executive luis@st-nicks.com Thank you,Lu is Montañez        Packet Page. 369 2 3 4 1 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Rochelle Clayton, Acting City Manager; Lynn Merrill, Director of Public Works Department:Public Works Subject:Approve Final Tract Map No. 20376 for 9 Townhouse Residential Units at the Northwest Corner of E. Pacific Street and N. Garden Drive (Ward 2) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-218: 1. Approving Final Tract Map No. 20376 (Subdivision 20-06) involving the subdivision a parcel (APN 0147-231-07) containing approximately 0.77 acres and the development and establishment of a townhouse development comprised of nine (9) detached residential units, located at the northwest corner of E. Pacific Street and N. Garden Drive; 2. Accepting the public dedications as set forth on said map; and 3. Authorizing execution of the standard form of agreement for the subdivision improvements. Executive Summary The project consists of subdividing a 0.77-acre parcel into a townhouse development with nine detached residential units, which was approved by the Planning Commission on April 12, 2022. The final tract map has been reviewed by the City Engineer and determined to be in compliance with the Subdivision Map Act, the City’s ordinances regarding subdivisions, and all conditions of approval. Background On April 12, 2022, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-016 approving Subdivision 20-06 (Tentative Tract Map 20376) and Development Permit        Packet Page. 370 2 3 4 1 Type-D 20-08, allowing the subdivision of a parcel containing approximately 0.77 acres and the development and establishment of a townhouse development comprised of nine (9) detached residential units located at the northwest corner of E. Pacific Street and N. Garden Drive (APN: 0147-231-07) within the Residential Medium (RM) zone. On June 11, 2024, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2024-018 approving Extension of Time 24-02 and allowing a one-year extension of time for Subdivision 20-06 (Tentative Tract Map 20376) and Development Permit Type-D 20- 08. Discussion The proposed project consists of subdividing a parcel (APN 0147-231-07), approximately 0.77 acres in size, and developing a townhouse community with nine detached residential units at the northwest corner of E. Pacific Street and N. Garden Drive. Pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 19.48 (Final and Parcel Maps) of the City of San Bernardino Development Code and the Subdivision Map Act, the applicant has submitted a Final Map for action and final acceptance by the Mayor and City Council. The City Engineer has reviewed the Final Map for Tract No. 20376 and determined it is in compliance with the Subdivision Map Act, the City’s subdivision ordinances, and all conditions of approval. 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals The adoption of a Resolution approving the Final Map for Tract No. 20376 aligns with Goal No. 1 Financial Stability. Specifically, the transformation of existing vacant underutilized properties into productive single-family residential lots for the purpose of developing single-family residential homes meets the City’s economic development goals. Fiscal Impact There will be no fiscal impact. All public infrastructure improvements required for this subdivision will be constructed by the developer at its sole cost. City services will be provided to this project similar to other residential projects in the City. Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-218: 1. Approving Final Tract Map No. 20376 (Subdivision 20-06) involving the subdivision a parcel (APN 0147-231-07) containing approximately 0.77 acres and the development and establishment of a townhouse development comprised of nine (9) detached residential units, located at the northwest corner of E. Pacific Street and N. Garden Drive; 2. Accepting the public dedications as set forth on said map; and        Packet Page. 371 2 3 4 1 3. Authorizing execution of the standard form of agreement for the subdivision improvements. Attachments Attachment 1 Resolution 2024-218 Attachment 2 Final Map for Tract 20376 Attachment 3 Tract 20376 Improvement Agreement Attachment 4 Project Bonds Attachment 5 Resolution No. 2022-016 (Planning Commission) Attachment 6 Resolution No. 2024-018 (Planning Commission) Ward: Second Ward Synopsis of Previous Actions: On April 12, 2022, Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-016 approving Subdivision 20-06 (Tentative Tract Map 20376) and Development Permit Type-D20-08. On June 11, 2024, Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2024-018 approving Extension of Time 24-02 for Subdivision 20-06 (Tentative Tract Map 20376).        Packet Page. 372 Resolution No. 2024-218 Resolution 2024-218 November 6, 2024 Page 1 of 3 5 5 9 0 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-218 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL MAP FOR TRACT NO. 20376 (SUBDIVISION 20-06) INVOLVING THE SUBDIVISION OF A PROJECT SITE CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 0.77 ACRES INTO NINE DETACHED RESIDENTIAL UNITS, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF E. PACIFIC STREET AND N. GARDEN DRIVE; ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC DEDICATIONS AS SET FORTH ON SAID MAP; AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE STANDARD FORM OF THE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS. WHEREAS, On April 12, 2022, Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-016 approving Subdivision 20-06 (Tentative Tract Map 20376) and Development Permit Type-D 20- 08, allowing the subdivision of a parcel containing approximately 0.77 acres and the development and establishment of a townhome development comprised of nine (9) detached residential units located at the northwest corner of E. Pacific Street and N. Garden Drive (APN: 0147-231-07) within the Residential Medium (RM) zone, and WHEREAS, On June 11, 2024, Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2024-018 approving Extension of Time 24-02 and allowing a one-year extension of time for Subdivision 20- 06 (Tentative Tract Map 20376) and Development Permit Type-D 20-08, and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed the approved Tentative Tract Map 20376 with conditions of approval, and has analyzed the Final Map for Tract No. 20376 in order to ensure consistency between the approved Tentative Tract Map 20376 with adopted conditions of approval and the final map requirements, and has determined that the Final Map for Tract No. 20376 has been found to be in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Tract Map 20376, and WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council find that proposed Tract Map 20376, located at the northwest corner of E. Pacific Street and N. Garden Drive (APN: 0147-231-07) within the Residential Medium (RM) zone together with the provisions of their design and improvement is consistent with the General Plan of the City of San Bernardino. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1.The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2. The Mayor and City Council hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of San Bernardino to execute the standard form Subdivision Improvement Agreement with Inland Self Storage & Management. attached and incorporated herein as Attachment 3, for the        Packet Page. 373 Resolution No. 2024-218 Resolution 2024-218 November 6, 2024 Page 2 of 3 5 5 9 0 improvements in said Tract Map as required by Title 19 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code and the California Subdivision Map Act. The time for performance is as specified in the Agreement. Said improvements are specifically described and shown on Drawings approved and on file in the office of the Public Works Department of the City of San Bernardino. SECTION 3. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted with the approval of Subdivision 21-11 (Tentative Tract Map 20421) on November 8, 2022. No further changes to the environmental conditions of the subject site or the proposed subdivision have occurred. Therefore, the previous environmental determination adopted for Subdivision 21-11 (Tentative Tract map 20421) remains valid, pursuant to Section 15162 (c) (Subsequent Negative Declarations) of the California environmental Quality Act. SECTION 4.The Final Map of said Tract Map is hereby approved and the City of San Bernardino hereby accepts as public property all dedications within the subdivision as shown on said Tract Map for streets, alleys (including access rights), drainage and other public easements. As a condition precedent to approval of Tract Map, the Subdivider shall first execute the Agreement referenced in Section 2 hereof for the improvements within said Tract Map limits. SECTION 5.Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable. SECTION 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately. APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 6th day of November 2024. Helen Tran, Mayor City of San Bernardino Attest: Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk Approved as to form: Sonia Carvalho, City Attorney        Packet Page. 374 Resolution No. 2024-218 Resolution 2024-218 November 6, 2024 Page 3 of 3 5 5 9 0 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) I, Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2024-218, adopted at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of November 2024 by the following vote: Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT SANCHEZ _____ _____ _______ _______ IBARRA _____ _____ _______ _______ FIGUEROA _____ _____ _______ _______ SHORETT _____ _____ _______ _______ REYNOSO _____ _____ _______ _______ CALVIN _____ _____ _______ _______ ALEXANDER _____ _____ _______ _______ WITNESS my hand and official seal of the City of San Bernardino this ___ day of ____ 2024. Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk        Packet Page. 375        Packet Page. 376        Packet Page. 377        Packet Page. 378        Packet Page. 379        Packet Page. 380        Packet Page. 381        Packet Page. 382        Packet Page. 383        Packet Page. 384        Packet Page. 385        Packet Page. 386        Packet Page. 387        Packet Page. 388 TRACT NO. 20376 FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSESCALLAND ENGINEERING INC. FRANCIS K. LIN P.L.S. 9645 DATE OF SURVEY: FEBRUARY 2023        Packet Page. 389 TRACT NO. 20376 FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSESCALLAND ENGINEERING INC. FRANCIS K. LIN P.L.S. 9645 DATE OF SURVEY: FEBRUARY 2023 LOTS 35-30TRACT NO. 2316M.B. 33/31 BASIS OF BEARINGS:THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS MAP IS BASED ON THE GRID BEARING N89°56'46"W , BETWEEN N.G.S. CONTROL STATION "EV3596" AND "EV3634" AS PER RECORDS ON THE FILE WITH NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY.DATUM STATEMENT:COORDINATES SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM (CCS83) ZONE 5, NAD 1983. (1991.35 EPOCH) ALL DISTANCES SHOWN ARE GROUND, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. TO OBTAIN GRID DISTANCES MULTIPLY GROUND DISTANCES BY 0.99993107 WHICH IS THE COMBINATION FACTOR OF N.G.S. CONTROL STATION "EV3634" LOT 10TRACT NO. 2316M.B. 33/31 LINE TABLE6'E1 NO BEARING LENGTH (GRID)L1 N84°28'02"E 15713.35' L2 N84°44'29"E 16590.10'L3 N77°54'34"W L4 N76°13'52"W L5 N89°38'29"E 7335.33' 6478.66' 880.14'LOT 1 33,353 SqFt0.767 Ac PACIFIC STREET 6'E1 BASIS OF BEARING CONTROL SCHEME TIES NOT TO SCALE P.M. NO. 3645P.M.B. 32/67LEGEND:REFERENCES:EASEMENT NOTES:1. 2. 3. INDICATES FOUND CONTROL STATION AS NOTED. INDICATES FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED. R1: TRACT MAP NO. 2316, M.B. 33/31 R2: PARCEL MAP NO. 3645, P.M.B. 32/67 R3: RECORD OF SURVEY 07-090, R.S. 151/78 E1 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, HOLDEROF A 6' WIDE EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITYPURPOSES AS SHOWN ON A DEED RECORDEDAPRIL 7, 1953 IN BOOK 3142, PAGE 480, O.R. INDICATES SET 2" X 30" IRON PIPE, TAGGED "PLS 9645", 12" DEEP.4. (M&R) INDICATES MEASURED AND RECORD PER REFERNECES 5. SFN INDICATES SEARCH AND FOUND NOTHING        Packet Page. 390        Packet Page. 391 Original (1) GRADING PERMIT PERFORMANCE BOND Bond#:4477411 Premium: $ 400.00 KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino, California ("City") has issued to RGC Family Trust-Roger Chi ("Principal") a precise grading permit-[Permits #LD 2300014, THR 23-063 ] (the "Permit") for work associated with [1208 Pacific Street -Cal Land Engineering grading plan], consisting of, but not limited to, the furnishing all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidentals for the grading and installation of related improvements connected with issuance of grading permits including the construction of drainage and protection devices and any other corrective work to remove and eliminate engineering and geological hazards for Parcel/Tract Map No. 20376 (the "Work"); 1208 Pacific Street, Detached SFR/Condos WHEREAS, the Permit is hereby referred to and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, Principal is required by the Permit to provide a good and sufficient bond for performance of the Permit, and to guarantee and warranty the Work performed thereunder. NOW, THEREFORE, Principal and SureTec Insurance Company ("Surety"), a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas , and duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, are held and firmly bound unto City in the sum of Sixteen Thousand DOLLARS ($16,000), said sum being not less than one hundred percent (1 00%) of the total cost of the Work as set forth in the Permit, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such, that if Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions, agreements, guarantees, and warranties in the Permit and Work and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified and in all respects according to their intent and meaning, and to indemnify and save harmless City, its officers, employees, and agents, as stipulated in the Permit, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. As part of the obligation secured hereby, and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. Surety, for value received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Permit, or to any plans, profiles, and specifications related thereto, or to the Work to be performed thereunder, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition.        Packet Page. 392 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals this 27th day of August , 20 24 . (Corporate Seal) (Corporate Seal) (Attach Attorney-in-Fact Certificate) RGC Family Trust Principal By __________________________ ___ Title _____________ _ SureTec Insurance Company Surety //? /? /"/ By p-~ /~c..--- Attorney-in-Fact Title David Melman The rate of premium on this bond is25/20/15/12/11/1 ~er thousand . The total amount of premium charges is $ 400.00 . (The above must be filled in by corporate attorney.) THIS IS A REQUIRED FORM Any claims under this bond may be addressed to: (Name and Address of Surety) (Name and Address of Agent or Representative for service of process in California, if different from above) (Telephone number of Surety and Agent or Representative for service of process in California) SureTec Insurance Company ~111 Camino Del Rio N., Ste . 900 San Diego, CA. 92108 David Melman J619) 400-4104        Packet Page. 393 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 =S=an;;.;;....;;;;;;D;....;;i....;;;..eg~o;;;._.. ________ _ On August 27, 2024, before me.._, --=D;;....;e=a=n=na;;;.....;:G;.;.... -=-F=on=s;...:;e...;:;..ca;:;;.._ ________ _ , Notary Public personally appeared __ ___....D""'al..lv...l.lido.l......l.lM..L.le.u.l.u..mlo.loda ...... n __________________ _ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persontsj whose nametsj iskre subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they execute d the same in his/her/their authorized capacityfiesj, and that by his/her/their signaturefs-j on the instrument the personfsj, or the entity upon behalf of which the personfsj 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 OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER D INDIVIDUAL 0 CORPORATE OFFICER D PARTNER(S) D MEMBER of LLC [8:1 ATTORNEY-IN-FACT D TRUSTEE(S) D GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR OTHER: ----------------------- SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES) SureTec Insurance Company DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Title or Type of Document N urn ber of Pages Date of Document Signer(s) other than named above        Packet Page. 394 POA# 4477411 JOINT LIMITED POWER OF ATIORNEY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That SureTec Insurance Company, a Corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas and having its principal office in the County of Harris, Texas and Markel Insurance Company {the "Company"}, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Illinois, and having its principal administrative office in Glen Allen , Virginia, does by these presents make, constitute and appoint: Gloria S. Becerra, Dave B. Roalkvam, David Melman, Amanda Harvey, Evan M. DeBow, Eric Taylor, Maria Melendez, Rene Brandt, Deanna Fonseca, Albert Espino Their true and lawful agent(s) and attorney(s)-in-fact, each in their separate capacity if more than one is named above, to make, execute, seal and deliver for and on their own behalf, individually as a surety or jointly, as co-sureties, and as their act and deed any and all bonds and other undertaking in suretyship provided, however, that the penal sum of any one such instrument executed hereunder shall not exceed the sum of: Fifty Million and 00/100 Dollars ($50,000,000.00) This Power of Attorney is granted and is signed and sealed under and by the authority of the following Resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors of SureTec Insurance Company and Markel Insurance Company : "RESOLVED, That the President, any Sen ior Vice Pres ident, Vice President, Assistant Vice Pres ident, Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Treasurer or Assistant Treasurer and each of them hereby is authorized to execute powers of attorney, and such authority can be executed by use of facsimile signature, which may be attested or acknowledged by any officer or attorney, of the company, qualifying the attorney or attorneys named in the given power of attorney, to execute in behalf of, and acknowledge as the act and deed of the SureTec Insurance Company and Markel Insurance Company, as the case may be, all bond undertakings and contracts of suretyship, and to affix the corporate seal thereto." IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Markel Insurance Company and SureTec Insurance Company have caused their official seal to be hereunto affixed and these presents to be signed by their duly authorized officers on the 22nd day of August , 2024 . SureTec Insurance Company By:~ Michael C. K_::y:esident State of Texas County of Harris : On this 22nd day of August 2024 A. D., before me, a Notary Public of the State of Texas, in and for the County of Harris, duly commissioned and qualified, came THE ABOVE OFFICERS OF THE COMPANIES, to me personally known to be the individuals and officers described in, who executed the preceding instrument, and they acknowledged the execution of same, and being by me duly sworn, disposed and said that they are the officers of the said companies aforesaid , and that the seals affixed to the proceeding instrument are the Corporate Seals of said Companies, and the said Corporate Seals and their signatures as officers were duly affixed and subscribed to the said instrument by the authority and direction of the said companies, and that Resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors of sa id Compan ies referred to in the preceding instrument is now in force . ,,,,,, .. ,,,,,, IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand, and affixed my Offici~~~~~ l~ 6t,~arris, the day and year f1rst above written . ...... f.<," . . . . . . . . . ~ ,, :'' ~ •• ·~l>--?8 Pu6;·-~ " .. -:. fJM .. U.o*<'~·. .. ~ : :~ 0·. :. : : • -By: --~UO~~--~--~~~-------: :_ ~ ~ .: E Chelsea Turner, Notary Public ~ • •• 41fr~:--c'~ : : My commission expires 7/6/2028 .. /AC Of ' Oa. .. ':. ~:·~ 13?c..6 A'l-".·' ~ , .. We, the undersigned Off1cers of SureTec Insurance Company and Markelln~~C~d~~~ert1fy that the anginal POWER OF ATIORNEY of wh ich the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy is still in full force and effect and has rfl!!;~e e9 ~~-,,,, *,,,, ... ,,.,, IN WITNESS WHEREOF , we have hereunto set our hands, and affixed the Seals of said Companies, on the 27th day of August 2024 Markel Insurance Company Any Instrument Issued in excess of the penalty stated above is totally void and without any validity. For verification of the authority of this Power you may call (713)812-0800 on any business day between 8 :30AM and 5:00 PM CST .        Packet Page. 395 Original ( 1) ON-SITE IMPROVEMENTS PERFORMANCE BOND Bond#:4477409 Premium: $2,980.00 KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino, California ("City") has issued to RGC Family Trust-Roger Chi ("Principal") a permit-[Permit No. ] (the "Permit") for work associated with [Resolution No . 2024-018-PC, (Subdivision 20-06), Development Permit Type-D20-08], for Parcel/Tract Map No. 20376 (the "Work"); 1208 Pacific Street, Detached SFR/Condo WHEREAS, the Permit is hereby referred to and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, Principal is required by the Permit to provide a good and sufficient bond for performance of the Permit, and to guarantee and warranty the Work performed thereunder. NOW, THEREFORE, Principal and Suretec Insurance Company ("Surety"), a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas , and duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, are held and firmly bound unto City in the sum of One hundred twenty four thousand DOLLARS ($124,000), said sum being not less than one hundred percent ( 1 00°/o) of the total cost of the Work as set forth in the Permit, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such, that if Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions, agreements, guarantees, and warranties in the Permit and Work and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified and in all respects according to their intent and meaning, and to indemnify and save harmless City, its officers, employees, and agents, as stipulated in the Permit, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. As part of the obligation secured hereby, and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees , incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. Surety, for value received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Permit, or to any plans, profiles, and specifications related thereto, or to the Work to be performed thereunder, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals this 27th day of August , 20 24.        Packet Page. 396 (Corporate Seal) RGC Family Trust Principal By ____________________________ _ Title ___________________ _ (Corporate Seal) SureTec Insurance Company Surety -~ By ~~ Attorney-in-Fact (Attach Attorney-in-Fact Certificate) Title David Melman The rate of premium on this bond igS/20/15/12/11/10 per thousand. The total amount of premium charges is $ __ 2...;_,9_8_0_.0_0 _________ _ (The above must be filled in by corporate attorney.) THIS IS A REQUIRED FORM Any claims under this bond may be addressed to : (Name and Address of Surety) (Name and Address of Agent or Representative for service of process in California, if different from above) (Telephone number of Surety and Agent or Representative for service of process in California) SureTec Insurance Company 3111 Camino Del Rio N., Ste. 900 San Diego , CA . 92108 David Melman (619) 400-41 04        Packet Page. 397 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 .::::S.=.an=D:...:.i.:..zeg=..:o::....._ _______ _ On August 27, 2024, before me.,2.., -""'"D=ea::::.:n.!.!.n!.!:a::......:G~. F:;_o::;:.!n~s::.:::e:.=.ca:::...._ ________ _ , Notary Public personally appeared __ ___...D""auv..J..lid""--lo.JM...L.le""l.u..mwawn __________________ _ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personfsj whose namefsj iskre subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacityffesj, and that by his/her/their signaturefsj on the instrument the personfsj, or the entity upon behalf of which the personfsj acted , executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERillRY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature ofNotary OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law , it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER D INDIVIDUAL 0 CORPORATE OFFICER D PARTNER(S) D MEMBERofLLC ~ ATTORNEY-IN-FACT D TRUSTEE(S) D GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR OTHER: ____________________ _ SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES) SureTec Insurance Company DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Title or Type of Document Number of Pages Date of Document Signer(s) other than named above        Packet Page. 398 POA# 4477409 JOINT LIMITED POWER OF ATIORNEY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS : That SureTec Insurance Company, a Corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas and having its principal office in the County of Harris, Texas and Markel Insurance Company (the "Company"), a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Illinois, and having its principal administrative office in Glen Allen, Virginia, does by these presents make, constitute and appoint : Gloria S. Becerra, Dave B. Roalkvam, David Melman, Amanda Harvey, Evan M. DeBow, Eric Taylor, Maria Melendez, Rene Brandt, Deanna Fonseca, Albert Espino Their true and lawful agent(s) and attorney(s)-in-fact, each in their separate capacity if more than one is named above, to make, execute, seal and deliver for and on their own behalf, individually as a surety or jointly, as co-sureties, and as their act and deed any and all bonds and other undertaking in suretyship provided, however, that the penal sum of any one such instrument executed hereunder shall not exceed the sum of: Fifty Million and 00/100 Dollars ($50,000,000.00) This Power of Attorney is granted and is signed and sealed under and by the authority of the following Resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors of SureTec Insurance Company and Markel Insurance Company : "RESOLVED, That the President, any Senior Vice President, Vice President, Assistant Vice President, Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Treasurer or Assistant Treasurer and each of them hereby is authorized to execute powers of attorney, and such authority can be executed by use of facsimile signature, which may be attested or acknowledged by any officer or attorney, of the company, qualifying the· attorney or attorneys named in the given power of attorney, to execute in behalf of, and acknowledge as the act and deed of the SureTec Insurance Company and Markel Insurance Company, as the case may be, all bond undertakings and contracts of suretyship, and to affix the corporate seal thereto." IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Markel Insurance Company and SureTec Insurance Company have caused their official seal to be hereunto affixed and these presents to be signed by their duly authorized officers on the 22nd day of August , 2024 . SureTec Insurance Company By:~ Michael C. K7esident State of Texas County of Harris : On this 22nd day of August 2024 A. D., before me, a Notary Public of the State of Texas , in and for the County of Harris, duly commissioned and qualified, came THE ABOVE OFFICERS OF THE COMPANIES, to me personally known to be the individuals and officers described in, who executed the preceding instrument, and they acknowledged the execution of same, and being by me duly sworn , disposed and said that they are the officers of the said compan ies aforesaid, and that the seals affixed to the proceeding instrument are the Corporate Seals of said Companies, and the said Corporate Seals and their signatures as officers were duly affixed and subscribed to the said instrument by the authority and direction of the said companies, and that Resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors of said Companies referred to in the preceding instrument is now in force . ,,,,,,, .. ,,,,,, IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand, and affixed my Offici~!.~~~ l~ 6t,~arris, the day and year first above written . ...... ~\; .········ ~ ,, ......... ~.-··~~YPus··.~'...... ~ : U:o"*<"~ ·:' -:. ~ : :~ 0·. :. : : • -By : --~~~~--~--~~~------- : :_ ~ ~ } ~ Chelsea Turner, Notary Public ~ • •• _.,/"~ ~~ .• : My commission expires 7/6/2028 . . "::... --~~OF A~~·· R:J ... : . . . We, the understgned Offtcers of SureTec Insurance Company and Markelln~~C~d~~~erttfy that the ongmal POWER OF ATIORNEY of which the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy is still in full force and effect and has rfd~~eeO~. ,,,, *1,,,,., ... ,,, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands, and affixed the Seals of said Companies, on the 27th day of August 2024 Markel Insurance Company Any Instrument Issued in excess of the penalty stated above is totally void and without any validity. For verification of the authority of this Power you may call (713)812 -0800 on any business day between 8:30AM and 5:00PM CST .        Packet Page. 399 Original (1) LANDSCAPE PERFORMANCE BOND Bond#:4477410 Premium: $1,875.00 KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino, California ("City") has issued to RGC Family Trust-Roger Chi ("Principal") a permit-[Permit No. LS 23-13] (the "Permit") for work associated with [1208 Pacific Street -MLAS Job No. 20.16, 2-27 -23], for Parcel/Tract Map No. 20376 (the "Work"); WHEREAS, the Permit is hereby referred to and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, Principal is required by the Permit to provide a good and sufficient bond for performance of the Permit, and to guarantee and warranty the Work performed thereunder. NOW, THEREFORE, Principal and Suretec Insurance Company . ("Surety"), a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas , and duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, are held and firmly bound unto City in the sum of Seventy five thousand DOLLARS ($75,000), said sum being not less than one hundred percent ( 1 00°/o) of the total cost of the Work as set forth in the Permit, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such, that if Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions, agreements, guarantees, and warranties in the Permit and Work and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified and in all respects according to their intent and meaning, and to indemnify and save harmless City, its officers, employees, and agents, as stipulated in the Permit, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. As part of the obligation secured hereby, and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. Surety, for value received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Permit, or to any plans, profiles, and specifications related thereto, or to the Work to be performed thereunder, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals this 27th day of August , 20 24.        Packet Page. 400 (Corporate Seal) RGC Family Trust Principal By __________________________ ___ Title ----------------------------- (Corporate Seal) Suretec Insurance Company Surety Y'? a-, ~ By ~.,---y - Attorney-in-Fact (Attach Attorney-in-Fact Certificate) Title David Melman The rate of premium on this bond is25/20/15/12/11/1 Oper thousand. The total amount of premium charges is $ $1,875.00 . (The above must be filled in by corporate attorney.) THIS IS A REQUIRED FORM Any claims under this bond may be addressed to: (Name and Address of Surety) (Name and Address of Agent or Representative for service of process in California, if different from above) (Telephone number of Surety and Agent or Representative for service of process in California) SureTec insurance Company 3111 Camino Del Rio N., Ste. 900 San D1ego, CA. 921 08 (619) 400-4104        Packet Page. 401 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 =S=a=n-=D:;...:i=eQ..go;:;;.._ ________ _ On August 27. 2024, before me~, _....;!D~ea::!!.n!!.n!!:!a:....-'G::::..·:....:F~o~n~s=-=e.=.:ca:::....._ ________ _ , Notary Public personally appeared __ ____._D.u.auv"""'"jdi.L..I.JM:..Lle"""l.u.m.u.~awn __________________ _ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persontsj whose nametsj isffife subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/sfie/tfie~' executed the same in his/fier/tfieir authorized capacityfiesj, and that by his/fier/tfieir signaturetsj on the instrument the persontsj, or the entity upon behalf of which the persontsj acted, executed the instrument. r···. • • • • • • • • oEANNAG~F'oosecA: • •• "f ••• • NOTARY PUBLIC· CALIFORNIA ~ a !!} .. COMMISSION#2412143 ~ t .... :; .... ~.~~:~;e:~~~tt ~:! • .t 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 ofNotary OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER D INDIVIDUAL 0 CORPORATE OFFICER D PARTNER(S) D MEMBER ofLLC [gj ATTORNEY-IN-FACT D TRUSTEE(S) D GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR OTHER: ----------------------- SIGNER IS REPRESENTING : NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES) SureTec Insurance Company DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT Title or Type of Document Number of Pages Date of Document Signer(s) other than named above        Packet Page. 402 POA# 4477410 JOINT LIMITED POWER OF ATIORNEY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That SureTec Insurance Company, a Corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas and having its principal office in the County of Harris, Texas and Markel Insurance Company (the "Company"), a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Illinois, and having its principal administrative office in Glen Allen, Virginia, does by these presents make, constitute and appoint: Gloria S. Becerra, Dave B. Roalkvam, David Melman, Amanda Harvey, Evan M. DeBow, Eric Taylor, Maria Melendez, Rene Brandt, Deanna Fonseca, Albert Espino Their true and lawful agent(s) and attorney(s)-in -fact, each in their separate capacity if more than one is named above, to make, execute, seal and deliver for and on their own behalf, individually as a surety or jointly, as co -sureties, and as their act and deed any and all bonds and other undertaking in suretyship provided, however, that the penal sum of any one such instrument executed hereunder shall not exceed the sum of: Fifty Million and 00/100 Dollars ($50,000,000.00) This Power of Attorney is granted and is signed and sealed under and by the authority of the following Resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors of SureTec Insurance Company and Markel Insurance Company: "RESOLVED, That the President, any Senior Vice President, Vice President, Assistant Vice President, Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Treasurer or Assistant Treasurer and each of them hereby is authorized to execute powers of attorney, and such authority can be executed by use of facsimile signature, which may be attested or acknowledged by any officer or attorney, of the company, qualifying the attorney or attorneys named in the given power of attorney, to execute in behalf of, and acknowledge as the act and deed of the SureTec Insurance Company and Markel Insurance Company, as the case may be, all bond undertakings and contracts of suretyship, and to affix the corporate seal thereto." IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Markel Insurance Company and SureTec Insurance Company have caused their official seal to be hereunto affixed and these presents to be signed by their duly authorized officers on the 22nd day of August , 2024 . SureTec Insurance Company ~ By: ----........... Michael C. K_:Y'"esident State of Texas County of Harris: On this 22nd day of August 2024 A. D., before me, a Notary Public of the State of Texas, in and for the County of Harris, duly commissioned and qualified, came THE ABOVE OFFICERS OF THE COMPANIES, to me personally known to be the individuals and officers described in, who executed the preceding instrument, and they acknowledged the execution of same, and being by me duly sworn, disposed and said that they are the officers of the said companies aforesaid, and that the seals affixed to the proceeding instrument are the Corporate Seals of said Companies, and the said Corporate Seals and their signatures as officers were duly affixed and subscribed to the said instrument by the authority and direction of the said companies, and that Resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors of said Companies referred to in the preceding instrument is now in force . ,,,,,, .. ,,,,,, IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand, and affixed my Offici~l.~~~ if~ ~~arris, the day and year first above written . ...... ~" .·······. ~ ,, :'' ~ •• ·~fl-.f\Y Pui;'·.~ .. -=:_ aM .. U.o*<'...-:·. , ~ = :~ 0· :. -• : -By: --~UD~~--~--~~~-------~ ~ ~ ~ .: ~ Chelsea Turner, Notary Public :. • •• 4fre:--c"~ •• : My commission expires 7/6/2028 • _.,.,..,Of ' • · .. ~ ~.·:-: 73?r:;.SA1,'_·· R> ...... We, the undersigned Officers of SureTec Insurance Company and Markelln-;.,..~c~d~~~ertify that the original POWER OF ATIORNEY of which the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy is still in full force and effect and has rfe~~~'"eelli~p~. ,, ...... ,,,,, ..... ,,, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands, and affixed the Seals of said Companies, on the 27th day of August 2024 Markel Insurance Company Any Instrument Issued in excess of the penalty stated above is totally void and without any validity. For verification of the authority of this Power you may call (713)812-0800 on any business day between 8 :30AM and 5:00 PM CST .        Packet Page. 403        Packet Page. 404        Packet Page. 405        Packet Page. 406        Packet Page. 407        Packet Page. 408        Packet Page. 409        Packet Page. 410        Packet Page. 411        Packet Page. 412        Packet Page. 413        Packet Page. 414        Packet Page. 415        Packet Page. 416        Packet Page. 417        Packet Page. 418        Packet Page. 419        Packet Page. 420        Packet Page. 421        Packet Page. 422        Packet Page. 423        Packet Page. 424        Packet Page. 425        Packet Page. 426        Packet Page. 427        Packet Page. 428        Packet Page. 429        Packet Page. 430        Packet Page. 431        Packet Page. 432        Packet Page. 433        Packet Page. 434        Packet Page. 435        Packet Page. 436        Packet Page. 437        Packet Page. 438        Packet Page. 439        Packet Page. 440        Packet Page. 441        Packet Page. 442        Packet Page. 443        Packet Page. 444        Packet Page. 445        Packet Page. 446        Packet Page. 447        Packet Page. 448        Packet Page. 449        Packet Page. 450        Packet Page. 451        Packet Page. 452        Packet Page. 453        Packet Page. 454        Packet Page. 455        Packet Page. 456        Packet Page. 457        Packet Page. 458        Packet Page. 459        Packet Page. 460        Packet Page. 461        Packet Page. 462        Packet Page. 463        Packet Page. 464 2 3 4 5 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Rochelle Clayton, Acting City Manager; Lynn Merrill, Director of Public Works, Operations, and Maintenance Department:Public Works Subject:Amendment No. 1 to Agreement with Environmental Project Services, Inc. for Citywide Sidewalk Repairs and Maintenance (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to Maintenance Services Agreement with Environmental Project Services, Inc. for Concrete Maintenance Services; and 2. Authorize the Director of Finance and Management Services to issue a change purchase order in not to exceed amount of $2,000,000. Executive Summary A purchase order in the amount not to exceed $2,000,000 is being requested for concrete maintenance services with Environmental Project Services, Inc. These services are utilized for City wide sidewalk maintenance and repair. This reflects an additional increase of $1,000,000 from the current purchase order amount as a result of City Council’s desire to address a backlog of sidewalk repairs. Background The Operations and Maintenance Division is responsible for all sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and cross gutters, as keeping them in good repair is essential to the safety of the public. On March 16, 2022, the Mayor and City Council was presented with a staff report        Packet Page. 465 2 3 4 5 recommending the issuance of an annual purchase order for $1,000,000 for concrete maintenance services with the low bidder, Environmental Project Services Inc. (EPS). At that meeting, the Mayor and City Council approved the recommendation, which authorized the execution of an agreement with Environmental Project Services, Inc. and the issuance of an annual purchase order in the amount of $1,000,000. On June 21, 2023, the Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No 2023-080 authorizing the Agency Director of Administrative Services to allocate $3,000,000 of the General Fund balance designated as the “Capital Contingency Reserve” for street segment repairs and sidewalk projects. From that amount, $1,000,000 has been set aside for sidewalk projects. This amount has been programmed into the current FY 24/25 budget for utilization this year. Discussion The City has contracted-out sidewalk and gutter concrete repair services for several years and has been limited to work within a $1,000,000 cap; however, in recent years, the City has had significant increases in its concrete maintenance needs, particularly in terms of sidewalk maintenance. Repairing City sidewalks and gutters are a quality- of-life issue for the City's residents and a liability issue for the City. In recent years, the amount of sidewalk repair requests from residents has represented one of the highest categories of service requests (CRMs) the City receives, often reaching more than 500 requests outstanding. Recent efforts have reduced that number to approximately 415; however, much work remains. In 2023, 199 CRMs for sidewalk repairs were completed—nearly exhausting all budgeted funds. The repairs that need to be made will vary and may involve a relatively simple replacement of a section or might consist of complex and/or larger concrete repairs. In other words, some repairs may involve lengthier stretches of sidewalk while others may involve complex repairs that involve matching curbs and gutters to existing forms. In an effort to improve the City infrastructure and prevent potential legal claims from injuries resulting from broken or missing sidewalks, staff is requesting the additional $1,000,000 for concrete services. This increase will provide an opportunity for the Department to maintain, upgrade, and repair sidewalks, curbs, and gutters, and significantly reduce the amount of open work order requests which currently totals 415 requests. 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals This project is consistent with Key Target No.1d: Minimize risk and litigation exposure. Approval of this recommendation will significantly reduce the risk of potential liability, and significantly reduce the amount of open work order requests. Fiscal Impact The fiscal impact for this item is $2,000,000. There is sufficient budget in the Department’s FY24/25 Operating Budget to fund this agreement. There is no additional        Packet Page. 466 2 3 4 5 impact to the General Fund. Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California: 1. Authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to Maintenance Services Agreement with Environmental Project Services, Inc. for Concrete Maintenance Services; and 2. Authorize the Director of Finance and Management Services to issue a change purchase order in not to exceed amount of $2,000,000. Attachments Attachment 1 Amendment No. 1 to Maintenance Services Agreement Attachment 2 Maintenance Services Agreement - Environmental Project Services Ward: All Wards Synopsis of Previous Council Actions: June 21, 2023 Mayor and City Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-080 authorizing the Agency Director of Administrative Services to allocate $3,000,000 of the General Fund balance designated as the “Capital Contingency Reserve” for street segment repairs and sidewalk projects. March 16, 2022 Mayor and City Council approved the recommendation, authorizing the execution of agreement with Environmental Project Services, Inc., and the issuance of an annual purchase order in the amount of $1,000,000.        Packet Page. 467 3 9 7 8 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO MAINTENANCE SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT SERVICES, INC. This Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for concrete maintenance services is made and entered into as of November 6, 2024 (“Effective Date”), by and between the City of San Bernardino, a charter city and municipal corporation (“City”) and Environmental Project Services, Inc. a California Corporation (“Vendor”). City and Vendor are sometimes referred to herein individually as a “Party” and collectively as “Parties.” RECITALS A. WHEREAS, the City and the Vendor have entered into an agreement, dated March 16, 2022, for the purpose of providing concrete maintenance services (the “Master Agreement”). B. WHEREAS, the City and the Vendor have entered into Amendment No. 1 to the Master Agreement, dated November 6, 2024, for the purpose of amending the compensation of the Master Agreement. C. WHEREAS, the Parties now desire to amend the Master Agreement in order to include additional funds for the continued performance of the services in accordance with the compensation provisions of the Master Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals and the mutual covenants, conditions, and promises contained in this Amendment No. 1 and the Master Agreement, the Parties mutually agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals listed above are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein by this reference. 2. Term. There is no change to the term of the Master Agreement. 3. Compensation. The compensation for services performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 1 shall not exceed One Million Dollars ($1,000,000), thereby increasing the total not to exceed compensation of the Master Agreement to the amount not to exceed Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000). Work shall be performed at the rates set forth in the Master Agreement. 4. Full Force. Except as amended by this Amendment No. 1, all provisions of the Master Agreement, including without limitation the indemnity and insurance provisions, shall remain in full force and effect and shall govern the actions of the Parties under this Amendment No. 1.        Packet Page. 468 3 9 7 8 5. Electronic Transmission. A manually signed copy of this Amendment No. 1 which is transmitted by facsimile, email or other means of electronic transmission shall be deemed to have the same legal effect as delivery of an original executed copy of this Amendment No. 1 for all purposes. This Amendment No. 1 may be signed using an electronic signature. 6. Counterparts. This Amendment No. 1 may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]        Packet Page. 469 3 9 7 8 SIGNATURE PAGE FOR AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO MAINTENANCE SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT SERVICES, INC. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 1 on the Effective Date first herein above written. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO APPROVED BY: Rochell Clayton, Acting City Manager ATTESTED BY: Genoveva Rocha, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Best Best & Krieger LLP City Attorney ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT SERVICES, INC. Signature Name Title        Packet Page. 470        Packet Page. 471        Packet Page. 472        Packet Page. 473        Packet Page. 474        Packet Page. 475        Packet Page. 476        Packet Page. 477        Packet Page. 478        Packet Page. 479        Packet Page. 480        Packet Page. 481        Packet Page. 482        Packet Page. 483        Packet Page. 484        Packet Page. 485        Packet Page. 486        Packet Page. 487        Packet Page. 488        Packet Page. 489        Packet Page. 490        Packet Page. 491        Packet Page. 492        Packet Page. 493        Packet Page. 494        Packet Page. 495        Packet Page. 496        Packet Page. 497        Packet Page. 498        Packet Page. 499 2 2 5 4 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Rochelle Clayton, Acting City Manager; Lynn Merrill, Director of Public Works, Operations, and Maintenance Department:Public Works Subject:Five-Year Capital Project Needs Analysis for FY 2025/26 to FY 2029/2030 for Measure I Expenditures (All Wards) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-219 approving the Five-Year Capital Project Needs Analysis (FY 2025/2026 through FY 2029/30) for Measure I Expenditure. Executive Summary Adoption of Resolution No. 2024-219 will approve the Five-Year Measure I Capital Project Needs Analysis (CPNA). The resolution is required to participate in the Valley Major Streets Program. The projects identified in the Resolution have been previously identified in the City’s Capital Improvement Program and will not impact the General Fund Background In November 1989, voters approved Measure I, allowing the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) to implement a one-half percent retail transaction and use tax throughout the county. This tax, commonly known as the 1/2-Cent Sales and Road Tax, was initially in place for 20 years, from April 1, 1990, to March 31, 2010. In November 2004, voters extended this tax for an additional 30 years, from April 1, 2010, through March 31, 2040. Measure I funds the Valley Major Streets Program, which supports regional arterial projects identified in the SBCTA Nexus Study. This study outlines fair share contributions for regional transportation improvements, including freeway interchanges, railroad grade separations, and regional arterial highways. To be eligible for Measure I funds, projects must be located on the Nexus Study Network, which        Packet Page. 500 2 2 5 4 represents major roadways in San Bernardino County’s urbanized areas. These projects are included in the City’s Regional Traffic Circulation System Master Facilities Plan and Impact Fee Program. Under the SBCTA San Bernardino Valley Subarea Expenditure Plan, eligible projects focus on improving congestion relief and safety on major streets that connect communities, serve significant destinations, and provide freeway access. Projects funded through this program aim to enhance roadway safety, alleviate traffic congestion, and make street improvements, particularly at rail crossings, while ensuring equitable distribution of funds across the county throughout the program’s lifespan. To participate in the Valley Major Street Program, agencies must annually adopt a Five-Year Capital Project Needs Assessment (CPNA) to outline project funding needs for each fiscal year. The CPNA includes anticipated funding sources, amounts, and project phases for eligible projects from the SBCTA Nexus Study. This information helps SBCTA staff prepare a comprehensive capital needs and cash flow analysis for the Valley Major Street Program. Currently, all four ongoing projects in the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) were included in the previous CPNA for Fiscal Years 2018/2019 through 2022/2023 and are listed in the proposed CPNA for Fiscal Years 2019/2020 through 2023/2024. These projects are also part of the City’s CIP and the adopted Master Facilities Plan for the Regional Circulation System Impact Fee, also known as the Development Impact Fee. One of the ongoing projects is the extension of State Street, identified in the General Plan Circulation Element as a major arterial roadway. For more than 25 years, completing the segment of State Street between Foothill Boulevard and 16th Street has been a priority. The project, which includes two bridges and addresses environmental concerns, was divided into four phases. On August 17, 2022, the City Council awarded a construction contract to Riverside Construction Company, Inc. Phase 1 of construction is substantially completed, with the remaining landscaping work estimated to be completed by the end of 2025. Another significant project involves widening "H" Street from Kendall Drive to 40th Street. This project aims to add two through lanes in each direction and a two-way left- turn lane. It includes right-of-way acquisition, undergrounding utility lines, pavement widening, rehabilitation, curb and gutter installation, sidewalks, ADA-accessible ramps, street lighting, drainage improvements, signage, striping, and traffic signal modifications at Kendall Drive and 40th Street. On October 18, 2017, the City Council approved a contract with CivilSource, Inc. for the environmental and civil engineering design of the project. The replacement of the Mt. Vernon Bridge, a 1,016-foot-long bridge spanning 20 train tracks, is a critical infrastructure project for the City. Built in 1934, the bridge is        Packet Page. 501 2 2 5 4 considered structurally deficient and functionally obsolete, with a sufficiency rating of less than 50 out of 100. Federal funding of $92 million was secured in 2015 for its replacement. Construction of the new bridge is currently underway and is scheduled for completion by 2026. To keep the Mt. Vernon Bridge project moving forward, the City will utilize the available funding from the Regional Circulation for the next 2-3 years while right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and undergrounding of utilities take place on 40th Street and “H” street widening projects. These activities will not delay the project’s progress or hinder other projects on the CPNA from advancing. The 40th Street Widening Project involves expanding the roadway from two lanes to four lanes between Johnson and Electric Avenue, as well as upgrading the traffic signal at Electric Avenue. Design work on this project is 90% complete, and right-of-way acquisition is in progress. The right-of-way acquisition process, which is required before undergrounding the utilities, typically takes several months to a year, depending on the complexity of the acquisitions. Once the acquisitions are completed, Southern California Edison will proceed with undergrounding the overhead utility lines under Rule 20-A at no cost to the City. Despite the required right-of-way process, the project is expected to move forward without significant delays. These four critical projects are essential for improving traffic flow, safety, and regional connectivity throughout San Bernardino. By ensuring that funding and right-of-way acquisition processes are aligned, the City is committed to advancing these projects without stalling other vital infrastructure developments listed in the CPNA. Discussion The projects listed in the proposed FY 2025/2026 through 2029/2030 CPNA for the City of San Bernardino have previously been identified in the City's Capital Improvement Program and are included in the adopted Master Facilities Plan for the Regional Circulation System Impact Fee (Development Impact Fee). The key difference between this Program and the Measure I Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan is that the projects listed in the CPNA are those select projects that qualify for and intend to use funding from the Measure I Valley Major Street Program, along with matching funds collected from new development through the City's Regional Circulation System Impact Fee. The Regional Circulation System Impact Fee was adopted in anticipation of this program, and to satisfy the requirement that the new development pay its fair share toward regional improvements funded by the Measure I Valley Major Street Program. Only projects that will use Valley Major Street Program funds are required to be included in the CPNA. The following four projects are recommended for continued inclusion in the CPNA:        Packet Page. 502 2 2 5 4 1. State Street, Phase 1, 16th Street to Base Line Street (SS04-009) 2. “H” Street Widening from 40th Street to Kendall Drive (SS04-152) 3. Mt. Vernon Bridge Replacement Project (SS04-012) 4. 40th Street Widening from Johnson Street to Electric Avenue (SS04-014) Eligible City of San Bernardino projects can have up to 67.6% of project costs paid by Measure I funds. Public works staff have ongoing coordination with SBCTA staff to determine reimbursement amounts for eligible projects. A table of estimated reimbursements for life-to-date project costs is provided below for 3 of the projects. Project LTD Project Costs Total Estimated Eligible for Measure I Total Measure I Received Estimated Remaining Measure I State Street (Phase 1)$8,329,677.39 $5,630,861.92 $1,089,029.81 $4,541,832.11 H Street Widening $340,858.68 $230,420.47 $148,232.87 $82,187.60 40th Street Widening $1,690,299.31 $1,142,642.33 $1,107,633.45 $35,008.88 The funding for Mt. Vernon Bridge is described in a Cooperative Agreement with SBCTA and the subsequent amendments. Total funding contributed from each funding source is provided below. These figures are from Amendment No. 3 to the Cooperative Agreement and are intended to show a breakdown of all funding sources. The latest estimated project cost is included in Exhibit A of the proposed resolution. Funding Source Amount Federal Highway Bridge Program $149,118,307 Federal Highway Infrastructure Program $23,495,394 Proposition 1B $3,452,670 BNSF $29,500,000 Measure I Valley Major Street Program $25,426,735 City of San Bernardino Development Impact Fees $14,686,779 Total Project Cost $245,679,885 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals The Measure I Five-year Capital Project Needs Analysis is consistent with Key Target No. 1f: Improved Operational & Financial Capacity - Create an asset management plan. This project will contribute to financial stability by creating an asset management plan that will aim to minimize risks and project costs and continue to monitor and evaluate project strategies. Fiscal Impact There is no General Fund impact associated with this action.        Packet Page. 503 2 2 5 4 Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, adopt Resolution No. 2024-219 approving the Five-Year Capital Project Needs Analysis (FY 2025/2026 through FY 2029/30) for Measure I Expenditure. Attachments Attachment 1 Resolution 2024-219 Attachment 2 Resolution 2024-219 Exhibit A Attachment 3 Project Location Maps Ward: All Wards Synopsis of Previous Council Actions: October 21, 2020 Resolution 2020-258 adopted Capital Project Needs Analysis for FY 2021/22 – FY 2025/26 July 21, 2021 Resolution 2021-179 adopted Capital Project Needs Analysis for FY 2022/23 – FY 2026/27 August 17, 2022 Resolution 2022-184 adopted Capital Project Needs Analysis for FY 2023/24 – FY 2027/28 December 6, 2023 Resolution 2023-187 adopted Capital Project Needs Analysis for FY 2024/25 – FY 2028/29        Packet Page. 504 Resolution No. 2024-219 Resolution 2024-219 November 6, 2024 Page 1 of 3 5 3 3 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-219 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE MEASURE I FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PROJECT NEEDS ANALYSIS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2025/2026 THROUGH 2029/2030. WHEREAS, San Bernardino County voters approved passage of Measure I in November 2004, authorizing the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority to impose a one-half of one percent retail transactions and use tax applicable in the incorporated and unincorporated territory of the County of San Bernardino; and WHEREAS, revenue from the tax can only be used for transportation improvement and traffic management programs authorized in the Expenditure Plans set forth in Ordinance No. 04- 01 of the Authority; and WHEREAS, the Strategic Plan requires each local jurisdiction applying for revenue from certain Measure I Programs to annually adopt and update a Five-Year Capital Project Needs Analysis; and WHEREAS, the projects listed in the proposed FY 2025/2026 through 2029/2030 CPNA for the City of San Bernardino have previously been identified in the City's Capital Improvement Program and are included in the adopted Master Facilities Plan for the Regional Circulation System Impact Fee (Development Impact Fee). WHEREAS, the following four projects are recommended for inclusion in the CPNA: 1. Mt. Vernon Bridge Replacement Project (SS04-012). 2. State Street, Phase 1, 16th Street to Base Line Street (SS04-009). 3. 40th Street Widening from Johnson Street to Electric Avenue (SS04-014). 4. “H” Street Widening from 40th Street to Kendall Drive (SS04-152). BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1.The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2. The City Council hereby adopts the five-year capital projects needs analysis (FY 2025/26 through FY 2029/30) for Measure I expenditure attached hereto as Exhibit A. SECTION 3.That the City Council finds this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA        Packet Page. 505 Resolution No. 2024-219 Resolution 2024-219 November 6, 2024 Page 2 of 3 5 3 3 3 applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty, as in this case, 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. SECTION 4.Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable. SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately. APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 6th day of November 2024. Helen Tran, Mayor City of San Bernardino Attest: Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk Approved as to form: Sonia Carvalho, City Attorney        Packet Page. 506 Resolution No. 2024-219 Resolution 2024-219 November 6, 2024 Page 3 of 3 5 3 3 3 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) I, Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2024-___, adopted at a regular meeting held on the ___ day of _______ 2024 by the following vote: Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT SANCHEZ _____ _____ _______ _______ IBARRA _____ _____ _______ _______ FIGUEROA _____ _____ _______ _______ SHORETT _____ _____ _______ _______ REYNOSO _____ _____ _______ _______ CALVIN _____ _____ _______ _______ ALEXANDER _____ _____ _______ _______ WITNESS my hand and official seal of the City of San Bernardino this ___ day of ____________ 2024. Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk        Packet Page. 507 Nexus Project Cost 9,000,000$ Dev. Loan?No 5-Year Advance?No Public Share:67.6% Dev. Share:32.40% Project Information Phase Funding PRIOR* FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FUTURE PA&ED Total Cost:$0.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $- $- $- $- $- $- $- DEV FEE $- $- $- $- $- $- $- - Select Fund - $- $- $- $- $- $- $- - Select Fund - $- $- $- $- $- $- $- Other: ______ $- $- $- $- $- $- $- PS&E Total Cost:$0.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $- $- $- $- $- $- DEV FEE $- $- $- $- $- $- - Select Fund - $- $- $- $- $- $- $- - Select Fund - $- $- $- $- $- $- $- Other: ______ $- $- $- $- $- $- $- ROW Total Cost:$0.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $- $- $- $- $- $- $- - Select Fund - $- $- $- $- $- $- $- - Select Fund - $- $- $- $- $- $- $- - Select Fund - $- $- $- $- $- $- $- Other: ______ $- $- $- $- $- $- $- CONST Total Cost:$6,718,686.55 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $4,541,832.11 $- $- $- $- $- $- DEV FEE $2,176,854.44 $- $- $- $- $- $- - Select Fund -$ $- $- $- $- $- $- - Select Fund - $- $- $- $- $- $- $- - Select Fund - $- $- $- $- $- $- $- - Select Fund - $- $- $- $- $- $- $- Other: ______ $- $- $- $- $- $- $- *Prior should identify any expenses incurred in prior years that have not yet been reimbursed by SBCTA including anticipated FY 2023/2024 expenses. Capital Project Needs Analysis City of San Bernardino Valley Arterial Sub-Program State Street Extension - Phase I - Baseline Street to 16th Street Current Total Project Cost Estimate: $9,000,000.00 Total Measure I Request: $4,541,832.11 (Summation of Measure I) Comments: 2026-2030 CPNA Template - Proj 1 Exhibit A        Packet Page. 508 Nexus Project Cost 8,500,000$ Dev. Loan?No 5-Year Advance?No Public Share:67.6% Dev. Share:32.40% Project Information Phase Funding PRIOR* FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FUTURE PA&ED Total Cost:$0.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - PS&E Total Cost:$0.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ROW Total Cost:$51,788.29 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $35,008.88 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $16,779.41 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - CONST Total Cost:$0.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $8,500,000.00 Capital Project Needs Analysis City of San Bernardino Valley Arterial Sub-Program 40th Street Widening from Johnson Street to Electric Avenue Current Total Project Cost Estimate: Comments: *Prior should identify any expenses incurred in prior years that have not yet been reimbursed by SBCTA including anticipated FY 2023/2024 expenses. Total Measure I Request: $35,008.88 (Summation of Measure I) 2026-2030 CPNA Template - Proj 2        Packet Page. 509 Nexus Project Cost 7,500,000$ Dev. Loan?-Select Yes/No- 5-Year Advance?-Select Yes/No- Public Share:67.6% Dev. Share:32.40% Project Information Phase Funding PRIOR* FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FUTURE PA&ED Total Cost:$0.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - PS&E Total Cost:$0.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ROW Total Cost:$121,579.29 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $ 77,187.60 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 39,391.69 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - MI LOCAL ST $ 5,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - CONST Total Cost:$0.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $7,500,000.00 Capital Project Needs Analysis City of San Bernardino Valley Arterial Sub-Program H Street Widening from 40th Street to Kendall Drive Current Total Project Cost Estimate: Comments: *Prior should identify any expenses incurred in prior years that have not yet been reimbursed by SBCTA including anticipated FY 2023/2024 expenses. Total Measure I Request: $77,187.60 (Summation of Measure I) 2026-2030 CPNA Template - Proj 3        Packet Page. 510 Nexus Project Cost 19,525,000$ Dev. Loan?No 5-Year Advance?Yes Public Share:67.6% Dev. Share:32.40% Project Information Phase Funding PRIOR* FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FUTURE PA&ED Total Cost:$0.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - HBP $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - RXR $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - PS&E Total Cost:$0.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ROW Total Cost:$0.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - HBP $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - RXR $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - CONST Total Cost:$92,160,492.00 Fund Type:MSI Arterial $ 7,132,830.00 $ 5,730,806.00 $ 504,098.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 3,784,150.00 $ 3,142,562.00 $ 265,671.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - RXR $ 5,036,721.00 $ 4,103,171.00 $ 91,158.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - HBP $ 32,284,577.00 $ 26,343,715.00 $ 700,967.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - PROP 1B $ 1,681,477.00 $ 1,358,589.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $242,417,534.00 Capital Project Needs Analysis City of San Bernardino Valley Arterial Sub-Program Mt. Vernon Bridge Replacement Current Total Project Cost Estimate: Comments: Nexus Project Cost is only Local Match *Prior should identify any expenses incurred in prior years that have not yet been reimbursed by SBCTA including anticipated FY 2023/2024 expenses. Total Measure I Request: $13,367,734.00 (Summation of Measure I) 2026-2030 CPNA Template - Proj 4        Packet Page. 511 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PROJECT LOCATION MAPS State Street Extension Phase 1        Packet Page. 512 40th Street from Johnson Street to Electric Avenue H Street from Kendall Drive Street to 40th Street        Packet Page. 513 Mt. Vernon Viaduct Bridge between 2nd Street and 5th Street        Packet Page. 514 1 8 6 6 CONSENT CALENDAR City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Rochelle Clayton, Acting City Manager Gabriel Elliott, Director of Community Development & Housing Department:Community Development & Housing Subject:Annexation of the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project and the 26-Acre Totally Surrounded Island (Ward 5) Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt: 1. Resolution No. 2024-220 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, making application to the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County (LAFCO) for Reorganization to include Annexation to the City of San Bernardino and Detachment from County Service Area 70, generally northerly of Meyers Road and Easterly of Martin Ranch Road (known as the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project); and 2. Resolution No. 2024-221 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, making an application to the Local Agency Formation Commission of San Bernardino County (LAFCO) for Reorganization to include Annexation to the City of San Bernardino and Detachment from County Service Area 70, generally northerly of Meyers Road and Easterly of Martin Ranch Road (known as the 26-Acre Totally Surrounded Island); and 3. Direct the City Manager to transmit the Resolutions to the Director of the Local Agency Formation Commission. Executive Summary The Spring Hills Specific Plan Project, approved in March 2013, requires annexation        Packet Page. 515 1 8 6 6 into the City limits. Subsequent to the approval, an application was submitted to the County of San Bernardino’s Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the annexation. In order for the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project to be annexed into the City of San Bernardino, LAFCO requires the City to initiate the annexation of both the Spring Trails Specific Plan and the 26-acre totally surrounded island area. At that time, LAFCO conducted an election of property owners for the 26 acres of totally surrounded island area, and the election failed to pass. However, the project proponent's legal counsel sent a letter to the City requesting to follow through on the annexation. This report outlines the history and includes the proposed action for adopting resolutions to initiate the actions and transmit the resolutions to LAFCO. Background The Spring Trails Project Specific Plan, approved in March 2013, is located in the northwestern part of the City in the Verdemont area, outside the city limits but inside the City’s Sphere of Influence. The Specific Plan proposes the development of 199 acres, allowing the creation of 215 residential lots. Due to site constraints, the original project was amended, reducing the project's scope by 43 acres and 92 residential lots. See Attachment 3, Location Map (Exhibit A-1). The request is for the City to initiate the annexations for the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project (Exhibits A and A-1) and the 26 acres of properties located between the Specific Plan boundary and the City limits (Exhibits C and C-1). This process is routinely done for projects within a city’s sphere of influence. This area between the City boundary line and the project would be a county area, which, if the Specific Plan were to be annexed, would create a County “unincorporated island” within the City’s boundary. The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) does not support these County islands within cities, primarily from a services provision standpoint. A condition was placed on the annexation process by LAFCO, which requires them (LAFCO) to proceed with the annexation. Further, the project proponent's legal counsel also sent a letter requesting the same. Chronology: City Approved Action In March 2013, the City of San Bernardino approved the Spring Trails Specific Plan (SP 10-01), which included a variety of underlying entitlements. The Specific Plan approvals included the adoption of Resolution No. 2013-34 that certified the Final Environmental Impact Report, the adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, and the adoption of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 02-09) (including the pre- annexation of the Specific Plan area); approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 15576; and approval of a Development Agreement. LAFCO Approved Action Proposal No. LAFCO 3188A – On October 16, 2019, LAFCO adopted Resolution No. 3091 approving the annexation of the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project Area (LAFCO        Packet Page. 516 1 8 6 6 Annexation No. 3188A) into the City of San Bernardino, subject to certain conditions of approval. The attachments from this meeting item are included in Attachment 9 for reference. During the processing of the annexation, a 26-acre area, including six parcels, was removed from the annexation, resulting in an unincorporated island surrounded by the City of San Bernardino. This area was removed because the registered voters occupying the six single-family residences/parcels located within the Project area had vocally opposed the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project, and it was unlikely that the annexation of the entire area, including the island, would be successful. As a result, the annexation continued without the unincorporated island area. As part of the proposed annexation, LAFCO imposed Condition of Approval No. 4, which states the following: The City of San Bernardino shall be required to initiate annexation of the totally surrounded island within one year of the Commission’s approval of LAFCO 3188A (a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B). A resolution by the City Council of the City of San Bernardino shall be submitted to the Executive Officer of LAFCO outlining the City’s commitment to fulfilling this requirement prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Completion for LAFCO 3188A. A status report shall be provided to the Commission at the six-month date outlining the progress of the City of San Bernardino in fulfilling its obligation. Failure on the part of the City of San Bernardino to fulfill its commitment to annex the totally surrounded island shall require that the next annexation proposed to the City of San Bernardino, either by the City through resolution or by the property owner/registered voter petition to include a condition requiring the initiation of the annexation of the totally surrounded island. Said condition of approval shall be deemed completed upon the issuance of the Certificate of Filing for said island. The above Condition of Approval No. 4 imposed by LAFCO holds the Certificate of Completion for LAFCO Annexation No. 3188A (Spring Trails Specific Plan Project Area) on hold until: a) the City of San Bernardino City Council adopts a resolution identifying its commitment to annex the 26-acre unincorporated island area at some time in the future, and, b) the City submits a copy of the adopted resolution to the Executive Officer of LAFCO. In essence, Condition of Approval No. 4 places a hold on the developer’s, (Montecito Equities, Ltd.) ability to proceed with the construction of the project until after the City Council adopts a resolution confirming its intent to annex the unincorporated island area into the City sometime in the future. City Actions Since LAFCO’s Approved Action On January 15, 2020, the Mayor and City Council considered the annexation of the remaining unincorporated island abutting the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project area (Exhibit C-1). Subsequent to discussion on the matter, the City Council tabled the item to an unspecified date. On March 18, 2020, the Mayor and City Council discussed this item in a Closed Session meeting based on a threat of litigation. Based on City Council direction, this item would be scheduled for an upcoming City Council meeting for consideration. On May 6, 2020, the Mayor and City Council again considered the annexation of the        Packet Page. 517 1 8 6 6 remaining unincorporated island abutting the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project area. Subsequent to discussion on the matter, the City Council tabled the item a second time to an unspecified date. Project Proponent Letter In August/September 2020, legal counsel for Montecito Equities verbally requested that the City reconsider placing the item back on the City Council agenda for consideration. Staff at the time opted not to place the item back on the Agenda until after the Municipal Election in November 2020. This pushed the item beyond the October 16, 2020, deadline established by LAFCO. Due to changes in staff, the item did not move forward in a timely manner. Due to the lapse in the City taking action, the project proponent is now requesting the item to be considered by the Mayor and City Council. Discussion In response to LAFCO and the project proponent, the City of San Bernardino desires to now initiate proceedings pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Section 56000 et seq. of the California Government Code) for the annexation of the unincorporated territory located in the Verdemont area, generally northerly of Meyers Road and easterly of Martin Ranch Road, more specifically described in Exhibit "A" (Legal Description) and depicted on Exhibit "A-1". The area proposed for reorganization is within the Sphere of Influence of the City of San Bernardino and fulfills the requirement imposed by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for San Bernardino County to initiate the annexation of the totally surrounded island area that would be created through the annexation of the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project. Through the LAFCO Annexation process, the City of San Bernardino requests that the proposed reorganization be subject to the following terms and conditions: (a) The standard terms and conditions required by LAFCO shall apply; and (b) The annexation shall be subject to any and all of the City of San Bernardino's fees, taxes, and special assessments as they currently exist or may exist at the completion of these proceedings. The reason for the proposed reorganization is to fulfill the requirement imposed by the LAFCO for San Bernardino County to initiate the annexation of the totally surrounded island area that would be created through the annexation of the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project. The Plan(s) for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis for the Specific Plan and island area that were prepared for the proposed reorganization have been reviewed and accepted and are included with the Resolutions in Attachment 4 (Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis - Spring Trails Specific Plan Project Area) and Attachment 8 (Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis - Meyers Road Island Area Annexation)        Packet Page. 518 1 8 6 6 CEQA The application for annexation is covered by the certified Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #2009111086) for the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project (Specific Plan No. SP 10-01; General Plan Amendment No. GPA 02-09, including pre- annexation of the Spring Trails site; Tentative Tract Map No. 15576 (Subdivision No. 02-09); and Development Agreement No. 11-01) approved February 19, 2013. No further environmental review is required for the project pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15162. 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals The proposed Annexation is consistent with Key Target No. 1: Improved Operational & Financial Capacity - Continue to seek opportunities to secure long-term revenue sources. Specifically, the area considered for annexation is within the City’s sphere of influence and has been anticipated for development as identified in the City’s General Plan. Future in-fill development, such as that proposed as a part of the Spring Trails project, will be a catalyst to encourage new development in the city that will generate additional revenue. Key Target No. 4b: Economic Growth & Development - Update the General Plan and Development Code, as it ensures this property meets the General Plan uses and will be included in a future City annexation of this unincorporated area. Fiscal Impact The adoption of the Resolutions committing to the annexation does not require the expenditure of General Fund revenues at this time. However, the attached Plans for Service and Fiscal Impacts identify the benefits of the proposed annexed areas in terms of surplus to the City’s General Fund. The Plans for Service also identify recurring General Plan costs based on the 2022-2023 City Budget. Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California adopt: 1. Resolution No. 2024-220 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, making application to the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County (LAFCO) for Reorganization to include Annexation to the City of San Bernardino and Detachment from County Service Area 70, generally northerly of Meyers Road and Easterly of Martin Ranch Road (known as the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project); and 2. Resolution No. 2024-221 of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, making an application to the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County for Reorganization to include Annexation to the City of San Bernardino and Detachment from County Service Area 70, generally northerly of Meyers Road and Easterly of Martin Ranch Road (known as the 26-Acre Totally Surrounded Island); and 3. Direct the City Manager to transmit the Resolutions to the Director of the Local Agency Formation Commission.        Packet Page. 519 1 8 6 6 Attachments Attachment 1 Resolution No. 2024-220 (Spring Trails Specific Plan Project) Attachment 2 Resolution No. 2024-220 (Spring Trails Specific Plan Project), Exhibit A - Legal Description Attachment 3 Resolution No. 2024-220 (Spring Trails Specific Plan Project), Exhibit A-1 - Location Map Attachment 4 Resolution No. 2024-220 (Spring Trails Specific Plan Project), Exhibit B - Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis Attachment 5 Resolution No. 2024-221 (26-Acre Totally Surrounded Island) Attachment 6 Resolution No. 2024-221 (26-Acre Totally Surrounded Island), Exhibit C - Legal Description Attachment 7 Resolution No. 2024-221 (26-Acre Totally Surrounded Island), Exhibit C-1 - Location Map Attachment 8 Resolution No. 2024-221 (26-Acre Totally Surrounded Island), Exhibit D - Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis Attachment 9 LAFCO Agenda Packet (October 19, 2019) Attachment 10 PowerPoint Presentation Ward: 5 Synopsis of Previous Council Actions March 2013 The City of San Bernardino approved the Spring Trails Specific Plan (SP 10-01), which included a variety of underlying entitlements, the adoption of Resolution No. 2013-34 that certified the Final Environmental Impact Report, the adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, and the adoption of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 02-09) (including the pre-annexation of the Specific Plan area); approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 15576; and approval of a Development Agreement. January 15, 2020 - The Mayor and City Council considered the annexation of the remaining unincorporated island abutting the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project area. Subsequent to discussion on the matter, the City Council tabled the item to an unspecified date. March 18, 2020 - The Mayor and City Council discussed this item in a Closed Session meeting based on a threat of litigation. Based on City Council direction, this item would be scheduled for an upcoming City Council meeting for consideration. May 6, 2020 - The Mayor and City Council considered the annexation of the remaining unincorporated island of the land abutting the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project area. Subsequent to discussion on the matter, the City Council tabled the item a second time to an unspecified date.        Packet Page. 520 Resolution No. 2024-220 Resolution No. 2024-220 November 6, 2024 Page 1 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-220 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, MAKING APPLICATION TO THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION FOR SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FOR REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND DETACHMENT FROM COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, GENERALLY NORTHERLY OF MEYERS ROAD AND EASTERLY OF MARTIN RANCH ROAD (KNOWN AS THE SPRING TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT) WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino desires to initiate proceedings pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Section 56000 et seq. of the California Government Code) for the annexation of unincorporated territory located in the Verdemont area, generally northerly of Meyers Road and easterly of Martin Ranch Road, more specifically described in Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibit "A-1", both made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the area proposed for reorganization is consistent with the Sphere of Influence for the City of San Bernardino; and WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino requests that the proposed reorganization be subject to the following terms and conditions: (a) the standard terms and conditions required by LAFCO shall apply; and (b) the annexation shall be subject to any and all of the City of San Bernardino's fees, taxes and special assessments as they currently exist or may exist at the completion of these proceedings; and WHEREAS, the reason for the proposed reorganization is that the property owner/developer of said Spring Trails Project has requested annexation to the City of San Bernardino for the purpose of receiving municipal services from the City for the said Project proposed for development within the reorganization area; and WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino has reviewed the Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis (included as Exhibit B) prepared for the proposed reorganization; and WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino acknowledges and agrees to the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County’s requirement for imposing legal indemnification as outlined in Policy 3 of Chapter 2 of the Internal Operations, Accounting, and Financial Section of its Policy and Procedure Manual. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1.The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.        Packet Page. 521 Resolution No. 2024-220 Resolution No. 2024-220 November 6, 2024 Page 2 of 4 SECTION 2. Application is hereby made to the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County to initiate proceedings for the reorganization of unincorporated territory located in the Verdemont area, generally northerly of Meyers Road and easterly of Martin Ranch Road, more specifically described and depicted in said Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1", respectively, to be known as City of San Bernardino Annexation No. 363. SECTION 3.That the City Manager of the City of San Bernardino is hereby directed and authorized to execute, on behalf of said City, the application documents, including the certification of the Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis. SECTION 4.The City Clerk of the City of San Bernardino is hereby directed and authorized to file or cause to be filed, a certified copy of this resolution with the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County. SECTION 5.The City Manager of the City of San Bernardino is hereby directed and authorized to prepare and deliver, or cause to be prepared and delivered, all application documents including and certified Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis necessary for the initiation of proceedings for the proposed reorganization with the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County. SECTION 6.CEQA. As the decision-making body for the project, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the administrative record for the proposed project. Based upon the facts and information contained in the administrative record, including all written and oral evidence presented to the City Council, the City Council finds, as follows: (1) The administrative record has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City’s Local CEQA Guidelines. (2) The application for annexation is covered by the certified Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #2009111086) for the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project (Specific Plan No. SP 10-01; General Plan Amendment No. GPA 02-09, including pre-annexation of the Spring Trails site; Tentative Tract Map No. 15576 (Subdivision No. 02-09); and Development Agreement No. 11-01) approved February 19, 2013. No further environmental review is required for the project pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15162. (3) The determination of CEQA exemption reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. SECTION 7.Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end, the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable. SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.        Packet Page. 522 Resolution No. 2024-220 Resolution No. 2024-220 November 6, 2024 Page 3 of 4 APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 6th day of November 2024. Helen Tran, Mayor City of San Bernardino Attest: Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk Approved as to form: Sonia Carvalho, City Attorney        Packet Page. 523 Resolution No. 2024-220 Resolution No. 2024-220 November 6, 2024 Page 4 of 4 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) I, Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2024-220, adopted at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of November 2024 by the following vote: Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT SANCHEZ _____ _____ _______ _______ IBARRA _____ _____ _______ _______ FIGUEROA _____ _____ _______ _______ SHORETT _____ _____ _______ _______ REYNOSO _____ _____ _______ _______ CALVIN _____ _____ _______ _______ ALEXANDER _____ _____ _______ _______ WITNESS my hand and official seal of the City of San Bernardino this ___ day of ____________ 2024. Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk        Packet Page. 524 Resolution No. 2024-220 Resolution No. 2024-220 November 6, 2024 Page 5 of 4 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION        Packet Page. 525 Resolution No. 2024-220 Resolution No. 2024-220 November 6, 2024 Page 6 of 4 EXHIBIT A-1 MAP        Packet Page. 526 Resolution No. 2024-220 Resolution No. 2024-220 November 6, 2024 Page 7 of 4 EXHIBIT B PLAN FOR SERVICE; FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS        Packet Page. 527 Page 1 of 4 LAFCO 3188A - REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND TO SBCFPD ZONE FP-5 SAN BERNARDINO, AND DETACHMENT FROM COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70 (Spring Trails Specific Plan) Prepared June 26, 2019 Those parcels of land located in Sections 26 and 35, Township 2 North, Range 5 West, San Bernardino Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of Section 26, T. 2 N., R. 5 W., SBM; Course 1. Thence S88°21’49”W along the South line of said Section 26, T. 2 N., R. 5 W., SBM, a distance of 364.15 feet, to a point on the Muscupiabe Rancho Line, as per County Surveyors Plat 7093, Records of San Bernardino County, State of California; Course 2. Thence S08°23’37”W along said Muscupiabe Rancho Line, a distance of 2529.03 feet, to a point on the San Bernardino City limits, said point also being the Northwest corner of Government Lot 3 of Section 35, T. 2 N., R. 5 W., SBM; Course 3. Thence continuing S08°23’37”W along said Muscupiabe Rancho Line, a distance of 757.58 feet, to a point on the centerline of Pennsylvania Avenue as shown on the Plat of the Town of Irvington and the Land of Irvington Land and Water Co., recorded in Map Book 3, Page 9, Records of San Bernardino County, said point also being the Southwest corner of Government Lot 3 of Section 35, T. 2 N., R. 5 W., SBM, said point also being an angle point on City of San Bernardino Annexation #257, LAFCO No. 920, Ordinance No. 3131, effective date 02/18/1971, said point also being the Point of Beginning; Course 4. Thence N62°54’32”W along said centerline of Pennsylvania Avenue and the border of City of San Bernardino Annexation #258, LAFCO No. 931, Ordinance No. 3142, effective date 03/05/1971, a distance of 560.57 feet, to a point on the east line of Lot “A” per Map Showing a Portion of the Meyer and Barclay Subdivision, recorded in Map Book 12, Page 18, Records of San Bernardino County; Course 5. Thence S05°57’38”E along said east line of Lot “A” and the border of said Annexation 258, a distance of 428.48 feet, to the Northeasterly corner of that certain 5 acres in the Southeast corner of said Lot “A”, as conveyed to Robert B. Meyer by deed recorded in book 173, page 156, of deeds, records of said County;        Packet Page. 528 Page 2 of 4 Course 6. Thence N83°59’22”W along the Northerly line of said 5 acres and the border of said Annexation 258, a distance of 590.94 feet; Course 7. Thence N86°44’09”W along the Northerly line of said 5 acres and the border of said Annexation 258, a distance of 52.61 feet, to a point on the centerline of Meyers Road as shown on Parcel Map No. 3540, recorded in Parcel Map Book 31, Page 84, Records of San Bernardino County; Course 8. Thence N51°36’40”W along said centerline of Meyers Road and the border of said Annexation 258, a distance of 543.37 feet, to its intersection with the prolongation of the easterly line of Parcel 1, Parcel Map No. 4093, recorded in Parcel Map Book 38, Page 53, Records of San Bernardino County; Course 9. Thence N15°43’10”E along said easterly prolongation and line of Parcel 1 and the easterly line of Parcel 2 of said Parcel Map No. 4093, a distance of 1433.20 feet; Course 10. Thence N15°44’02”E along the prolongation of the easterly line of said Parcel 2 a distance of 30.01 feet to the southeast corner of Lot “D,” per Map Showing a Portion of the Meyer and Barclay Subdivision, recorded in Map Book 12, Page 18, Records of San Bernardino County; Course 11. Thence N15°53’54”E along the easterly line of said Lot “D” a distance of 30.01 feet; Course 12. Thence N15°53’55”E continuing along the easterly line of said Lot “D”, a distance of 306.36 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot “D”; Course 13. Thence N57°15’54”W along the northerly line of said Lot “D” a distance of 448.80 feet to the northwesterly corner of said Lot “D”, said point also being the Northeasterly corner of Parcel 3 per said Parcel Map No. 3540, said point also being a point on the border of said Annexation 258; Course 14. Thence N57°17’03”W along the Northeasterly line of said Parcel 3 and the border of said Annexation 258, a distance of 124.74 feet; Course 15. Thence N62°44’40”W continuing along the Northeasterly line of said Parcel 3 and the border of said Annexation 258, a distance of 513.33 feet, to the Southeasterly corner of parcel Map No. 3810, recorded in Parcel Map Book 34, Page 92, Records of San Bernardino County; Course 16. Thence leaving said Annexation 258 boundary and City of San Bernardino boundary N39°38’54”E along the Southeasterly line of said Parcel Map No. 3810, a distance of        Packet Page. 529 Page 3 of 4 1759.07 feet, to the Northeasterly corner of Parcel 3 of said Parcel Map No. 3810; Course 17. Thence along the N50°12’07”W line of said Parcel 3, a distance of 708.05 feet, to the Northwesterly corner of said Parcel 3; Course 18. Thence S39°34’04”W along the Northwesterly line of said Parcel 3, a distance of 244.19 feet, to the Southeasterly corner of Parcel 4 of Parcel Map No. 3809, recorded in Parcel Map Book 44, Page 20, Records of San Bernardino County; Course 19. Thence N50°06’43”W along the Southwesterly line of said Parcel 4, a distance of 812.32 feet, to the Southwesterly corner of said Parcel 4; Course 20. Thence N00°26’59”E along the Westerly line of said Parcel 4, a distance of 282.88 feet, to the Westerly corner of said Parcel 4, said point also being on the Muscupiabe Rancho Line; Course 21. Thence N54°45’38”E along the Northwesterly line of said Parcel 4 and the Muscupiabe Rancho Line, a distance of 478.62 feet, to its intersection with the Westerly line of Government Lot 2, Section 26, Township 2 North, Range 5 West, San Bernardino Meridian, according to the official plat of the survey of said land approved June 24, 1898, in the office of the County Recorder of said County; Course 22. Thence leaving the Muscupiabe Rancho Line N00°53’02”W along said Westerly line of Government Lot 2, a distance of 738.53 feet, to the center quarter corner of said Section 26; Course 23. Thence N88°19’04”E along the South line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 26, a distance of 664.29 feet, to the Southeast corner of the Southwest quarter, of the Southwest quarter, of the Northeast quarter of said Section 26; Course 24. Thence N00°33’58”W a distance of 657.91 to the Northeast corner of the Southwest quarter, of the Southwest quarter, of the Northeast quarter of said Section 26; Course 25. Thence S88°26’50”W a distance of 332.12 feet to the Southwest corner of the East half of the Northwest quarter, of the Southwest Quarter, of the Northeast quarter of said Section 26; Course 26. Thence N00°57’21”W a distance of 659.47 feet to the Northwest corner of the East half of the Northwest quarter, of the Southwest Quarter, of the Northeast quarter of said Section 26;        Packet Page. 530 Page 4 of 4 Course 27. Thence N88°28’05”E a distance of 336.62 feet to the Northeast corner of the Northwest quarter, of the Southwest Quarter, of the Northeast quarter of said Section 26; Course 28. Thence N01°07’38”W a distance of 330.44 feet to the Northwest corner of the South half of the Southeast quarter, of the Northwest Quarter, of the Northeast quarter of said Section 26; Course 29. Thence N88°19’45”E a distance of 668.78 feet to the Northeast corner of the South half of the Southeast quarter, of the Northwest Quarter, of the Northeast quarter of said Section 26; Course 30. Thence S00°20’43”E a distance of 331.76 feet to the Northwest corner of the Southeast quarter, of the Northeast quarter of said Section 26; Course 31. Thence N88°23’28”E a distance of 1333.28 feet to the Northeast corner of the Southeast quarter, of the Northeast quarter of said Section 26; Course 32. Thence S00°39’48”E along the Easterly line of said Section 26 a distance of 1317.40 feet; Course 33. Thence S00°36’49”W along the Easterly line of said Section 26 a distance of 2759.84 feet to the point of Commencement. Said parcel contains 349.36 acres more or less. 2-12-24 Edward J. Bonadiman, P.L.S. DATE Exp. 12-31-25 https://jebonadiman-my.sharepoint.com/personal/civildesign_bonadiman_com/Documents/JOBS-2011-2015/2013/133952 Montecito Equities LTD - Spring Trails/Legal Description/133952 LAFCO Boundary REV5 for City.doc        Packet Page. 531 COURSE 1 COURSE 2 COURSE 3 COURSE 4 COURSE 5 COURSE 6 COURSE 7 COURSE 8 COURSE 9 COURSE 10 COURSE 11 COURSE 12 COURSE 13 COURSE 14 COURSE 15 COURSE 16 COURSE 17 COURSE 18 COURSE 19 COURSE 20 COURSE 21 COURSE 22 COURSE 23 COURSE 24 COURSE 25 COURSE 26 COURSE 27 COURSE 28 COURSE 29 COURSE 30 COURSE 31 COURSE 32 COURSE 33 Line Table Line # COURSE 1 COURSE 2 COURSE 3 COURSE 4 COURSE 5 COURSE 6 COURSE 7 COURSE 8 COURSE 9 COURSE 10 COURSE 11 COURSE 12 COURSE 13 COURSE 14 COURSE 15 COURSE 16 COURSE 17 COURSE 18 COURSE 19 COURSE 20 COURSE 21 COURSE 22 COURSE 23 COURSE 24 COURSE 25 COURSE 26 COURSE 27 COURSE 28 COURSE 29 COURSE 30 COURSE 31 COURSE 32 COURSE 33 Direction S88° 21' 49"W S08° 23' 37"W S08° 23' 37"W N62° 54' 32"W S05° 57' 38"E N83° 59' 22"W N86° 44' 09"W N51° 36' 40"W N15° 43' 10"E N15° 44' 02"E N15° 53' 54"E N15° 53' 55"E N57° 15' 54"W N57° 17' 03"W N62° 44' 40"W N39° 38' 54"E N50° 12' 07"W S39° 34' 04"W N50° 06' 43"W N00° 26' 59"E N54° 45' 38"E N00° 53' 02"W N88° 19' 04"E N00° 33' 58"W S88° 26' 50"W N00° 57' 21"W N88° 28' 05"E N01° 07' 38"W N88° 19' 45"E S00° 20' 43"E N88° 23' 28"E S00° 39' 48"E S00° 36' 49"W Length 364.15 2529.03 757.58 560.57 428.48 590.94 52.61 543.47 1433.20 30.01 30.01 306.36 448.80 124.74 513.33 1759.07 708.05 244.19 812.32 282.88 478.62 738.53 664.29 657.91 332.12 659.47 336.62 330.44 668.78 331.76 1333.28 1317.40 2759.84 D111133952E.J.B.CHECKED BY:JOB NO: 06-26-19DISREGARD PRINTS BEARING EARLIER REVISION DATES SCALE:DRAWN BY: PREPARED FOR: S.P.G. SHEET: 1" = 400' MONTECITO EQUITIES LTD OF E S T . 1 9 4 1 LAFCO 3188A LAFCO 3188A - REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND TO SBCFPD ZONE FP-5 SAN BERNARDINO, AND DETACHMENT FROM COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70 (SPRING TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN) 0 SCALE: 1"= 400' 400 400 800 1200 VICINITY MAP N.T.S. GENERAL DESCRIPTION · · LEGEND LAFCO 3188A - REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND TO SBCFPD ZONE FP-5 SAN BERNARDINO, AND DETACHMENT FROM COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70 (SPRING TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN) Exhibit A-1        Packet Page. 532 11661 San Vicente Blvd. Suite 306 Los Angeles, California 90049-5111 310.820.2680-p, 310.820.8341-f www.stanleyrhoffman.com Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino Prepared for: City of San Bernardino 290 North D Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 909.384.7272 October 10, 2023 SRHA Job # 1405        Packet Page. 533 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 i Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CERTIFICATION The City of San Bernardino hereby certifies that this document presents the data and information required for the Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis for the Spring Trails Annexation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATE ____________ ___________ _ SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT ___________ _ TITLE OF APPLICANT City of San Bernardino, California        Packet Page. 534 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 ii Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CONTENTS Tables ......................................................................................................................................... iv Figures .......................................................................................................................................... v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... vi CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Overview of the City of San Bernardino ........................................................................... 3 1.3 Organization of the Report .............................................................................................. 3 CHAPTER 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................ 4 2.1 Residential Development ................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Infrastructure ................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Assessed Valuation and Property Tax .............................................................................. 7 2.4 Sales and Use Tax ............................................................................................................. 9 CHAPTER 3 PUBLIC FACILITIES BEFORE AND AFTER ANNEXATION ........................................ 12 3.1 General Government ..................................................................................................... 13 3.2 Fire and Paramedic ........................................................................................................ 14 3.3 Sheriff/Police ................................................................................................................. 14 3.4 Library ............................................................................................................................ 16 3.5 Parks and Recreation ..................................................................................................... 17 3.6 Animal Control ............................................................................................................... 18 3.7 Street Lighting ................................................................................................................ 20 3.8 Landscape Maintenance ................................................................................................ 20 3.9 Water ............................................................................................................................. 20 3.10 Wastewater Collection ................................................................................................... 23 3.11 Transportation ............................................................................................................... 23 3.12 Flood Control and Drainage ........................................................................................... 26 3.13 Utilities ........................................................................................................................... 26 3.14 Schools ........................................................................................................................... 26 3.15 Solid Waste Management .............................................................................................. 28 3.16 Public Health and Welfare ............................................................................................. 29 CHAPTER 4 PAYING FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ..................................... 30 4.1 Spring Trails Facilities and Infrastructure ....................................................................... 30 4.2 City of San Bernardino Development Impact Fees ........................................................ 30 4.3 Schools ........................................................................................................................... 33 4.4 Utilities ........................................................................................................................... 33 4.5 Roads and Drainage ....................................................................................................... 33 4.6 Water and Sewer ........................................................................................................... 33 CHAPTER 5 FISCAL IMPACTS ................................................................................................ 34 5.1 City General Fund ........................................................................................................... 34 5.2 Other Funds ................................................................................................................... 36        Packet Page. 535 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 iii Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 6 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO FISCAL ASSUMPTIONS ............................................... 37 6.1 City General Assumptions .............................................................................................. 37 6.2 City Revenue Assumptions ............................................................................................. 39 6.3 City Cost Assumptions .................................................................................................... 43 APPENDIX A SUPPORTING LAND USE TABLE ........................................................................ 48 APPENDIX B SUPPORTING FISCAL TABLES ............................................................................ 49 APPENDIX C PROJECT REFERENCES ...................................................................................... 55        Packet Page. 536 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 iv Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis TABLES 1 Summary of Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts ..................................................................... viii 2 Summary of Projected Other Funds Recurring Revenues ....................................................... viii 2-1 Residential Development Description ....................................................................................... 6 2-2 Public Infrastructure Development Description ....................................................................... 6 2-3 Assessed Valuation, and Property Tax ...................................................................................... 8 2-4 Estimated Existing Assessed Valuation ..................................................................................... 9 2-5 Estimated Offsite Sales and Use Tax by Project Residents ..................................................... 11 3-1 Current and Anticipated Service Providers in the Spring Trails Annexation ........................... 13 4-1 Spring Trails Facilities and Infrastructure ................................................................................ 31 4-2 Summary of Spring Trails Development Impact Fees ............................................................. 32 5-1 Summary of Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts ..................................................................... 34 5-2 Detailed General Fund Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts .................................................... 35 5-3 Summary of Projected Other Funds Recurring Revenues ....................................................... 36 6-1 City Population, Housing and Employment Assumptions ....................................................... 38 6-2 General Fund and Other Funds Recurring Revenue Factors ................................................... 40 6-3 General Fund Recurring Cost Factors ...................................................................................... 44 6-4 Calculation of City General Government Overhead Rate ....................................................... 45 A-1 Roads, Drainage, Sewer, Parks, Trails and Open Space Phasing ............................................. 48 B-1 General Fund Adopted Revenues, Fiscal Year 2022-23 ........................................................... 49 B-2 Revenues for Other City Fund, Fiscal Year 2022-23 ................................................................ 51 B-3 Estimated In Lieu Property Tax of Vehicle License Fees (VLF) Factor ..................................... 52 B-4 Calculation of Use Tax Factor .................................................................................................. 52 B-5 Estimated Annual Residential Turnover .................................................................................. 53 B-6 General Fund Net Community Development Cost Factor ....................................................... 54        Packet Page. 537 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 v Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis FIGURES 1-1 Spring Trails Annexation Regional Vicinity ............................................................................. 2 2-1 Spring Trails Annexation Local Vicinity ................................................................................... 5 3-1 Fire Protection ....................................................................................................................... 15 3-2 City of San Bernardino Police Department: Northwest District .......................................... 17 3-3 Spring Trails Specific Plan Parks, Trails, and Open Space .................................................. 19 3-4 Spring Trails Specific Plan Landscape Zones ...................................................................... 21 3-5 Spring Trails Specific Plan Conceptual Water Plan ............................................................ 22 3-6 Spring Trails Specific Plan Conceptual Sewer Plan ............................................................ 24 3-7 Spring Trails Specific Plan Conceptual Circulation Plan ....................................................... 25 3-8 Spring Trails Specific Plan Conceptual Drainage Plan ........................................................ 27 3-9 Local Elementary, Middle and High Schools ........................................................................ 28        Packet Page. 538 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 vi Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides an assessment of public service delivery capabilities of the City of San Bernardino and other agencies or special districts affected by the proposed Spring Trails Annexation to the City of San Bernardino. The City of San Bernardino is surrounded by the cities of Highland, Redlands, Colton and Rialto. This report is being submitted to the County of San Bernardino Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) as a “Plan for Service” required by California Government Code Section 56653. Currently, the County of San Bernardino provides many services to the annexation area including fire and paramedic services, general government, development services, sheriff patrol, public library, regional parks and recreation, street lighting, transportation, flood control and drainage, and health and welfare. Public schools are provided by the San Bernardino Unified School District. After annexation, the City of San Bernardino is anticipated to provide services including general government, community development, police protection, local parks and recreation, community services and public works’ services. The City of San Bernardino has annexed into the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) and its Service Zone FP-5 for fire protection and emergency medical response services. Since the Spring Trails annexation area is already within SBCFPD and Service Zone FP-5, the SBCFPD will continue to be the service provider for fire protection and emergency medical services. The County of San Bernardino will continue to provide other services such as regional parks and recreation, regional flood control and drainage and health and welfare. The proposed annexation area includes the Spring Trail Specific Plan, a proposed residential community in the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains. The preferred plan accommodates 215 new single-family lots ranging from 10,801 square feet to 18 acres. The development footprint encompasses about two thirds of the total site, on gently sloping alluvial benches between canyons, steep hillsides, and the Cable Canyon and Meyers Canyon drainage ways. The remaining one third of the site remains open space. There are 3.8 miles of trails that traverse the site and provide access to parks and natural open space.        Packet Page. 539 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 vii Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Fiscal Impacts Based on an analysis of current service delivery capabilities, the City is equipped to handle additional demand from the proposed annexation of the 215 new homes planned for Spring Trails. One or more community facilities district(s) will be formed to pay for the cost of certain offsite public facilities necessary for the development of the Project, including roads and traffic improvements, parks and open space improvements, flood control and drainage systems, water and sewer systems, and utilities. A capital improvement plan, and rate and method of apportionment will be prepared which will outline the facilities cost, rates, and manner of collection. The onsite streets, landscaping, lighting, community walls, community fences, open space, detention basins, and drainage systems will be maintained by the Homeowners Association (HOA). However, a Community Facilities District (CFD) will be approved as a backup to the HOA, in case the HOA is does not adequately maintain these facilities. The offsite roads, drainage systems, lighting, and utilities will be maintained by the City. The San Bernardino Municipal Water Department will maintain the onsite and offsite water and sewer systems. This report explains the transfer of service requirements upon annexation, estimates development impact fees and other cost responsibilities. General Fund. As shown in Table 1, projected recurring fiscal impacts to the City General Fund for the Spring Trails Annexation is shown to generate a surplus for all phases. At buildout a recurring annual surplus of $37,705 is projected to the General Fund. Projected surpluses to the General Fund for Year 1 through Year 4 range from $827 for Year 1 to $37,705 for Year 4. The projected surpluses for all years assume revenues from the recently adopted CFD 2018-1 tax for safety services family unit. Other Funds. Projected recurring revenues for the Gas Tax Fund and Measure I Fund that are earmarked for street and road related expenditures are presented in Table 2. Gas Tax Fund. As shown in Panel A of Table 2, projected recurring gasoline revenues to the City are projected. The projected revenues range from $67 for Year 1 to $16,112 at buildout. Measure I Fund. Projected recurring Measure I sales tax revenues to the City are projected to range from $88 for Year 1 to $5,949 at buildout, as shown in Panel B of Table 2.        Packet Page. 540 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 viii Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 1 Summary of Projected General Fund Recurring Fiscal Impacts Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) 1 Summary of Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts Table 2 Summary of Projected Other Funds Recurring Revenues Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) 2 Summary of Projected Other Funds Recurring Revenues Year 1 - 2026 Year 2 - 2027 Year 3 - 2028 Year 4 - 2029 Year 5 - 2030 Existing Buildout Unit New Units New Units New Units of New Units General Fund (Grading)(Phase 1)(Phase 2)(Phase 3)(Phase 4) Estimated Annual Recurring Revenues $2,719 $66,413 $178,387 $311,172 $493,179 Estimated Annual Recurring Costs $1,892 $63,085 $168,438 $290,822 $455,474 Estimated Annual Recurring Surplus $827 $3,328 $9,949 $20,351 $37,705 Estimated Annual Revenue/Cost Ratio 1.44 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J. P. Weber Group, September 2023 Year 1 - 2026 Year 2 - 2027 Year 3 - 2028 Year 4 - 2029 Year 5 - 2030 Existing Buildout Unit New Units New Units New Units of New Units Other Funds (Grading)(Phase 1)(Phase 2)(Phase 3)(Phase 4) A. Fund 126 - Gas Tax 1 Annual Recurring Gasoline Tax $67 $2,233 $5,962 $10,294 $16,122 B. Fund 129 - Measure I 1 1/2 cent sales and road tax $88 $860 $2,207 $3,791 $5,949 1. Annual recurring gasoline tax and Measure I revenues are restricted to street related expenditures. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J. P. Weber Group, September 2023        Packet Page. 541 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 1 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The Spring Trails Annexation area is on the northern edge of the City of San Bernardino in the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains, as shown in Figure 1.1. The site is approximately 1.5 miles east of the unincorporated community of Devore and the junction of Interstate 215 (I-215) and I-15. The Spring Trails Annexation area is bounded by the San Bernardino National Forest on three sides and the City of San Bernardino on the southern side. 1.1 Purpose of the Study The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) of the County of San Bernardino requires a jurisdiction to submit a Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis when the jurisdiction is affected by a proposed change in boundaries, formation, or organization. The proposed project intends to annex into the City of San Bernardino, which requires the City to show that the necessary infrastructure improvements and services can be provided to the proposed development. Per the application form in the LAFCO Policy and Procedure Manual, Updated September 2018, the Plan for Service must include the following components: a. A description of the level and range of each service to be provided to the affected territory. b. An indication of when those services can feasibly be extended to the affected territory. c. An identification of any improvement or upgrading of structures, roads, water or sewer facilities, other infrastructure, or other conditions the affected agency would impose upon the affected territory. d. The Plan shall include a Fiscal Impact Analysis which shows the estimated cost of extending the service and a description of how the service or required improvements will be financed. The Fiscal Impact Analysis shall provide, at a minimum, a five (5)-year projection of revenues and expenditures. A narrative discussion of the sufficiency of revenues for anticipated service extensions and operations is required. e. An indication of whether the affected territory is, or will be, proposed for inclusion within an existing or proposed improvement zone/district, redevelopment area, assessment district, or community facilities district. f. If retail water service is to be provided through this change of organization, provide a description of the timely availability of water for projected needs within the area based upon the factors identified in Government Code Section 65352.5 (as required by Government Code Section 56668(k)).        Packet Page. 542 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 2 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 1-1 Spring Trails Annexation Regional Vicinity Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 1-1 Spring Trails Annexation Regional Vicinity Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Montecito Equities, Ltd., Spring Trails Draft Specific Plan, October 2012        Packet Page. 543 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 3 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis 1.2 Overview of the City of San Bernardino The City of San Bernardino is the county seat of San Bernardino County, occupying 62.5 square miles and is an anchor city for the Inland Empire. The 2023 city population is estimated at 223,230. Residents have access to more than 40 parks and fields, including premier athletic facilities, 7 community centers, a year-round aquatics center, a public library system, two higher education institutions, and 73 K-12 public schools. Major employers in the city include the County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino City Unified School District, California State University, the City of San Bernardino, Saint Bernardino Medical Center, the Community Hospital of San Bernardino, Caltrans, Stater Bros. Markets, Wells Fargo and Omnitrans. The city has been a major transit hub for over 100 years with the Interstate 10 and 215, the 210 and 259 Freeways, and the Metrolink commuter rail service. San Bernardino is a charter city, which means that the city has supreme authority over its municipal affairs, rather than being bound by the state’s general law if the City were a general law city. The City operates under a City Council-City Manager form of government. The Mayor and the seven-seat City Council are elected positions. Under the supervision of the City Council, the City Manager is the Chief Administrative Officer and directs most of the City Departments, other than the City Attorney and City Clerk, who report directly to the City Council, and the Municipal Water Department and the Library, which are governed by the Water Board and the Library Board of Trustees, respectively. 1.3 Organization of the Report Chapter 2 contains the description of the annexation area and the proposed development. The analysis of existing public service delivery in the annexation area and upon annexation into the City is presented in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 discusses the development impact fees and charges for infrastructure associated with the proposed annexation. The fiscal impact analysis of the annual operations and maintenance costs for the provision of services to the annexation area is provided in Chapter 5. Chapter 6 covers the revenue and cost assumptions used for the fiscal analysis. Appendix A includes the detailed infrastructure description for the Annexation. Supporting tables for the fiscal assumptions appear in Appendix B. Appendix C lists the project contacts and references used in the preparation of this study.        Packet Page. 544 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 4 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This chapter presents the detailed land uses for the Spring Trails Annexation. Information includes housing units, population, assessed valuation and taxable sales. The total Spring Trails Annexation includes one existing unit and the proposed Spring Trails Specific Plan 215 new units. As shown in Figure 2-1, the Spring Trails Annexation is in Verdemont Heights, approximately one- third mile northwest of the intersection of Meyers Road and Little League Drive. Primary access is from a new roadway connecting to Little League Drive and a secondary roadway via a new road extending south and connecting to the frontage road along I-215. Freeway access is from the Palm Avenue interchange and the Glen Helen Parkway/Devore Road interchange. 2.1 Residential Development As shown in Panel A of Table 2-1, there is one existing residential unit located on the Spring Trails site. With the 215 lots proposed for the Spring Trails site, total lots for the Annexation after buildout are 216. Based on the January 1, 2023 Citywide average estimate of 3.34 persons per unit from the Department of Finance, total population for the Annexation is projected at 750 after buildout, as shown in Panel B of Table 2-1. 2.2 Infrastructure One or more community facilities district(s) will be formed to pay for the cost of certain offsite public facilities necessary for the development of the Project, including roads and traffic improvements, parks and open space improvements, flood control and drainage systems, water and sewer systems, and utilities. A capital improvement plan, and rate and method of apportionment will be prepared which will outline the facilities cost, rates, and manner of collection. Table 2-2 presents only the Spring Trails project infrastructure that is publicly maintained through the City General Fund and other City Funds or Departments. The total publicly and        Packet Page. 545 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 5 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 2-1 Spring Trails Annexation Local Vicinity Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 2-1 Spring Trails Annexation Local Vicinity Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J.P. Weber Group, November 2016        Packet Page. 546 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 6 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 2-1 Residential Development Description Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 2-1 Residential Development Description Table 2-2 Public Infrastructure Development Description Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 2-2 Public Infrastructure Development Description Year 1 - 2026 Year 2 - 2027 Year 3 - 2028 Year 4 - 2029 Year 5 - 2030 Existing Buildout Unit New Units New Units New Units of New Units Category (Grading)(Phase 1)(Phase 2)(Phase 3)(Phase 4)Total A. Residential Units Existing Unit - Spring Trails Project Site 1 0 0 0 0 1 New Units - Spring Trails Project Site 0 29 50 58 78 215 Total Annual Units 1 29 50 58 78 216 Total Cumulative Units 1 30 80 138 216 Spring Trails - New Annual Residential Square Feet 2 n/a 78,300 135,000 156,600 210,600 580,500 Total Cumulative New Square Feet n/a 78,300 213,300 369,900 580,500 B. Population 3 Total Annual Population 3 97 167 194 261 722 Total Cumulative Population 3 100 267 461 722 1. Land uses and phasing for the Spring Trails Specific Plan are provided by J. P. Weber Group. 2. Based on information from the developer, the average unit size is 3,200 square feet. 3. Population is projected at the Citywide average of 3.34 persons per unit for January 1, 2023. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J. P. Weber Group, September 2023 Year 1 - 2026 Year 2 - 2027 Year 3 - 2028 Year 4 - 2029 Year 5 - 2030 Existing Buildout Unit New Units New Units New Units of New Units Category (Grading)(Phase 1)(Phase 2)(Phase 3)(Phase 4)Total A. Roads - Offsite (Publicly Maintained) Primary Access 1.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.04 Secondary Access 2.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.61 Total Lane Miles 3.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.65 Cumulative Lane Miles 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 B. Drainage - Offsite (Publicly Maintained) Reinforced Concrete Box Lineal Feet 1,430 0 0 0 0 1,430 Reinforced Concrete Pipe Lineal Feet 3,685 0 0 0 0 3,685 Arch Culvert Lineal Feet 580 0 0 0 0 580 Total Lineal Feet 5,695 0 0 0 0 5,695 Cumulative Lineal Feet 5,695 5,695 5,695 5,695 5,695 C. Sewer - Onsite and Offsite (Publicly Maintained) Sewer Main Lineal Feet 4,017 10,857 0 13,479 0 28,353 Cumulative Lineal Feet 4,017 14,874 14,874 28,353 28,353 1. Only the publicly maintained road, drainage and sewer infrastructure is presented in this table. All on onsite roads, drainage, parks, trails and open space will be maintained through a homeowners association. Appendix Table A-1 presents the total roads, drainage, sewer, parks, trails and open space for the Spring Trails project. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J. P. Weber Group, September 2023        Packet Page. 547 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 7 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis privately maintained roads, drainage, sewer, parks, trails and open space infrastructure for the Annexation is presented in Appendix Table A-1. All water and sewer infrastructure will be operated and maintained by the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department. As shown in Panel A and Panel B of Table 2-2, only the proposed offsite streets of 3.65 lane miles and the 5,695 lineal feet of offsite drains will be publicly maintained by the City. Sewer mains will be publicly maintained by the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department and are estimated at 28,353 lineal feet after buildout of the project. The onsite streets, landscaping, lighting, community walls and fences, open space, detention basins, and drainage systems will be maintained by the Homeowners Association. 2.3 Assessed Valuation and Property Tax Assessed valuation for the total Spring Trails Annexation after buildout is projected at about $167.75 million, as shown in Panel B of Table 2-3. The current assessed valuation of about $2.50 million is estimated for Year 1. Existing assessed valuation is based on the County Assessor’s 2023 tax roll value, as shown in Table 2-4. New residential valuation for the proposed Spring Trails Specific Plan is based on residential pricing provided by the project developer. The following summarizes the average values per unit by Phase provided by the project applicant based on information from Land Advisors, Inc.: • Phase 1 $750,000 per unit • Phase 2 $760,000 per unit • Phase 3 $770,000 per unit • Phase 4 $780,000 per unit Projected Property Tax As shown in Panel C of Table 2-3, the City General Fund will not receive property tax for the assessed valuation of the annexation area. The San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) is now providing fire protection to the City. Based on the service agreement between the two jurisdictions, the property tax that would usually accrue to the City will remain with the SBCFPD and no property tax from other County funds and districts will be allocated to the City. Projected Property Tax in Lieu VLF The City General Fund will receive property tax in lieu of vehicle license fees (VLF) based on the increase in assessed valuation in the City. Per State law, when an annexation occurs the        Packet Page. 548 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 8 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 2-3 Assessed Valuation and Property Tax Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) 2-3 Assessed Valuation, and Property Tax Year 1 - 2026 Year 2 - 2027 Year 3 - 2028 Year 4 - 2029 Year 5 - 2030 Existing Buildout Unit New Units New Units New Units of New Units Category (Grading)(Phase 1)(Phase 2)(Phase 3)(Phase 4)Total A. Residential Units Existing Unit - Spring Trails Project Site 1 0 0 0 0 1 New Units - Spring Trails Project Site 0 29 50 58 78 215 Total Annual Units 1 29 50 58 78 216 Total Cumulative Units 1 30 80 138 216 B. Assessed Valuation Current Valuation 2 $2,496,189 Phase 1a @ $750,000 per Unit $21,750,000 Phase 1b @ $760,000 per Unit $38,000,000 Phase 2a @ $770,000 per Unit $44,660,000 Phase 2b @ $780,000 per Unit $60,840,000 Total Annual Valuation $2,496,189 $21,750,000 $38,000,000 $44,660,000 $60,840,000 $167,746,189 Total Cumulative Valuation $2,496,189 $24,246,189 $62,246,189 $106,906,189 $167,746,189 C. Projected Property Tax Annual 1 Percent Property Tax Levy $24,962 $217,500 $380,000 $446,600 $608,400 $1,677,462 (@ 1% of Valuation) Annual General Fund Property 3 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 (@ 0% of 1 Percent Levy) Total Cumulative Projected Property Tax $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D. Projected Property Tax In Lieu VLF Total Annual Valuation for Property Tax In Lieu VLF 4 $0 $21,750,000 $38,000,000 $44,660,000 $60,840,000 $165,250,000 Total Cumulative Valuation for Property Tax In Lieu VLF $0 $21,750,000 $59,750,000 $104,410,000 $165,250,000 Total Cumulative Projected Property Tax In Lieu VLF $0 $27,623 $75,883 $132,601 $209,868 (@ $1,270 per $1,000,000 Assessed Valuation) times Share Allocated to General Fund 5 73.5%73.5%73.5%73.5%73.5% equals General Fund Property In Lieu VLF $0 $20,303 $55,774 $97,462 $154,253 1. Phasing and valuation for the Spring Trails Specific Plan are provided by the applicant, J. P. Weber Group. The applicant's valuation is estimated based on information from Land Advisors Inc. of Irvine, California. 2. Current assessed valuation is based on the 2023 tax roll values. 3. The San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) provides fire protection to the City. Based on an agreement between the City and the SBCFPD, the City will not receive any allocation of the basic one percent property tax levy upon annexation of the Spring Trails project. 4. Property tax in lieu of vehicle license fees (VLF) is projected based on the increase in assessed valuation in a jurisdiction. Per State law, when an annexation occurs the existing valuation in the annexing area cannot be used in adjusting the amount of assessed valuation in the annexing City. Therefore, the current valuation of $2,496,189 is not included in the projection of property tax in lieu of VLF. 5. Based on the agreement between the SBCFPD and the City, the City will receive 73.5 percent of the projected property tax in lieu of VLF and the remaining 26.5 percent of the property tax in lieu of VLF will go to the SBCFPD. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J. P. Weber Group, September 2023 City of San Bernardino, Finance Director        Packet Page. 549 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 9 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 2-4 Estimated Existing Assessed Valuation: 2023 Tax Roll Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 2-4 Estimated Existing Assessed Valuation existing valuation in the area that is being annexed cannot be used in adjusting the base amount of assessed valuation in the annexing City. The City will receive property tax in-lieu of VLF based on the change in its gross assessed valuation of taxable property for new development in the annexed area. As shown in Appendix Table B-5, the property tax in lieu of VLF in the City is projected to increase at $1,270 per million dollars of new assessed valuation (AV). However, based on the service agreement between the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) and the City, the City will receive 73.5 percent of the projected property tax in lieu of VLF and the remaining 26.5 percent will go to the SBCFPD. As shown in Panel D of Table 2-3, no property tax in lieu VLF is projected for existing valuation in Year 1 per State law. By Year 2 property tax in lieu VLF is projected at $27,623 and 73.5 percent or $20,303 goes to the City. Total property tax in lieu VLF increases to $75,883 by Year 3, with $55,774 going to the City. By Year 4, total property tax in lieu VLF is projected at $132,601 and the amount for the City is projected at $97,462. After buildout (Year 5) of the Spring Trails project total property tax in lieu VLF is projected at $209,868, with 73.5 percent of this amount, or $154,253, projected for the City. 2.4 Sales and Use Tax Sales and use tax is projected for the retail taxable sales that will be captured in the City from offsite purchases made by the future residents of the Spring Trails Specific Plan. The fiscal Assessor Assessed Value Parcel Number Acres Land Improvement Total Land Type 0348-071-05-0000 5.00 $7,534 $0 $7,534 Single Family Residential - Vacant 0348-071-06-0000 20.00 $34,852 $0 $34,852 Single Family Residential - Vacant 0348-071-07-0000 5.00 $7,534 $0 $7,534 Single Family Residential - Vacant 0348-071-09-0000 100.28 $107,589 $0 $107,589 Single Family Residential - Vacant 0348-071-10-0000 40.00 $66,204 $0 $66,204 Public Facilities 0348-101-83-0000 23.561 $90,019 $0 $90,019 Single Family Residential - Vacant 0348-101-84-0000 7.02 $26,834 $109,029 $135,863 Single Family Residential 0348-111-03-0000 36.00 $1,042,000 $0 $1,042,000 Single Family Residential - Vacant 0348-111-04-0000 45.45 $72,642 $0 $72,642 Single Family Residential - Vacant 0348-111-07-0000 28.92 $34,852 $0 $34,852 Single Family Residential - Vacant 0348-111-08-0000 33.50 $897,100 $0 $897,100 Single Family Residential - Vacant 344.73 $2,387,160 $109,029 $2,496,189 Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J. P. Weber Group San Bernardino County, Office of the Assessor, Property Information System, 2023 Roll Values        Packet Page. 550 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 10 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis analysis assumes that the residents of the existing home on the Spring Trails site are already making purchases in the City. Therefore, no offsite sales and use tax is projected for the existing unit. Offsite retail sales and use tax from taxable purchases made by future Spring Trails Specific Plan residents is projected based on the resident’s estimated household income and estimated taxable retail purchases made in the City. Household income is estimated at 28 percent of average housing value based on a mortgage cost analysis by Stanley R. Hoffman Associates. Based on the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistic, Consumer Expenditure Survey, the fiscal analysis estimates the Spring Trails’ residents will generate total taxable retail purchases at about 33 percent of household income. Sales and Use Tax As shown in Table 2-5, estimated annual offsite retail sales and use tax from taxable purchases made by future Spring Trails Specific Plan residents are projected at $62,332 after buildout. This estimate is based on total household income projected at about $48.97 million after buildout (28 percent of residential valuation of about $167.75 million). At 33 percent of household income, the projected retail taxable purchases made by Spring Trails’ residents are projected at about $15.5 million after buildout. The fiscal analysis assumes that 35 percent of the retail taxable purchases, or about $5.42 million, will be made annually in the City at buildout. At one percent of the estimated captured taxable sales of about $5.42 million, sales tax is projected at $54,249 after buildout. At the City average use tax rate of 14.9 percent of sales tax, an additional $8,083 of use tax is projected after buildout. Total sales and use tax captured in the City by the future residents of Spring Trails is projected at $62,332 after buildout. Based on the projected residential valuation for each Phase, the offsite sales and use tax from future residents is projected to increase from $9,009 in Year 2 to $62,332 by Year 5.        Packet Page. 551 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 11 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 2-5 Estimated Offsite Sales and Use Tax by Project Residents Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) 2-5 Estimated Offsite Sales and Use Tax by Project Residents Year 1 - 2026 Year 2 - 2027 Year 3 - 2028 Year 4 - 2029 Year 5 - 2030 Existing Buildout Unit New Units New Units New Units of New Units Category (Grading)(Phase 1)(Phase 2)(Phase 3)(Phase 4)Total A. ANNUAL PROJECTIONS Annual New Residential Valuation $2,496,189 $21,750,000 $38,000,000 $44,660,000 $60,840,000 $167,746,189 Annual Household Income (@ 28% of household valuation) 1 $698,933 $6,090,000 $10,640,000 $12,504,800 $17,035,200 $46,968,933 Annual Taxable Retail Spending (@ 33% of household income)$230,648 $2,009,700 $3,511,200 $4,126,584 $5,621,616 $15,499,748 Annual Projected Off-Site Retail Taxable Sales Captured in City $80,727 $703,395 $1,228,920 $1,444,304 $1,967,566 $5,424,912 (@ 35% capture) Annual Projected Sales and Use Tax to City Sales Tax (@ 1% of taxable sales)$807 $7,034 $12,289 $14,443 $19,676 $54,249 Use Tax (@ 14.9% of sales tax)120 1,048 1,831 2,152 2,932 8,083 Total Projected Sales and Use Tax $927 $8,082 $14,120 $16,595 $22,608 $62,332 B. CUMULATIVE PROJECTIONS Cumulative Sales and Use Tax $927 $9,009 $23,129 $39,724 $62,332 1. Based on current mortage-based estimates obtained from Zillow, and with housing expenditures at 30% of household income. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.        Packet Page. 552 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 12 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 3 PUBLIC FACILITIES BEFORE AND AFTER ANNEXATION This chapter describes the existing and anticipated future service providers for the proposed Spring Trails Annexation project area. The level and range of the services for the annexation area are described, if they are known. The following services are detailed in this chapter: • General Government • Fire and Paramedic • County Sheriff and Public Safety • Library • Parks and Recreation • Animal Control • Street Lighting • Landscape Maintenance • Water • Sewer • Transportation • Flood Control and Drainage • Utilities • Schools • Solid Waste Management • Health and Welfare Table 3-1 presents current and anticipated service providers in the Spring Trails annexation area. In many cases, such as general government, community development, economic development, and sheriff/police, among others, responsibilities shift from the County of San Bernardino to the City of San Bernardino. The City of San Bernardino has annexed into the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) and its Service Zone FP-5 for fire protection and emergency medical response services. Since the annexation area is already within SBCFPD and Service Zone FP-5, the SBCFPD will continue to be the service provider for fire protection and emergency medical services upon annexation. Other services, like water, sewer, and utilities, remain unchanged before and after annexation. These changes are detailed in subsequent sections of this chapter.        Packet Page. 553 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 13 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 3-1 Current and Anticipated Service Providers in the Spring Trails Annexation Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 3-1 Current and Anticipated Service Providers in the Spring Trails Annexation 3.1 General Government Before Annexation The County of San Bernardino provides general government services, including: all Administrative services, Community Development services, and Economic Development services to the annexation area. After Annexation After the annexation, the City of San Bernardino will provide the general government services Service Type Current Service Provider Anticipated Service Provider General Government - Administrative Services: Finance Division County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Human Resources Division County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Business Registration County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Community Development: Planning County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Building & Safety County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Code Compliance County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Police Department Fire and Paramedic San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD), Service Zone FP-5 San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD), Service Zone FP-5 Sheriff/Police County of San Bernardino Sheriff's Department City of San Bernardino Police Department Library County of San Bernardino Library District City of San Bernardino Public Library Parks and Recreation: Local Facilities County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Regional Facilities County of San Bernardino County of San Bernardino Animal Control Contract with City of San Bernardino Police Department's Animal Control Division City of San Bernardino Police Department's Animal Control Division Street Lighting City of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Public Works Department Landscape Maintenance Forest/Natural HOA Water: Domestic Water Private City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Dept. (SBMWD) Recycled Water Private City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Dept. (SBMWD) Water Quality Private City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Dept. (SBMWD) Sewer Private/Septic Systems City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Dept. (SBMWD) Transportation: Freeways and Interchanges Caltrans Caltrans Arterials and Collectors San Bernardino County - Public Works City of San Bernardino Public Works Department Local Roads San Bernardino County - Public Works City of San Bernardino Public Works Department Transit Omnitrans Omnitrans Flood Control and Drainage: Local Facilities San Bernardino County Flood Control District HOA Regional Facilities San Bernardino County Flood Control District San Bernardino County Flood Control District Utilities: Cable/Internet Provider/Phone Charter Communications Charter Communications Telephone Verizon Verizon Power Southern California Edison Southern California Edison Natural Gas Southern California Gas Company Southern California Gas Company Schools San Bernardino City Unified School District (SBCUSD)San Bernardino City Unified School District (SBCUSD) Solid Waste Management San Bernardino County Solid Waste Management Division contract with Burrtec City of San Bernardino contract with Burrtec Health and Welfare San Bernardino County Department of Public Health San Bernardino County Department of Public Health Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Website Spring Trails Specific Plan        Packet Page. 554 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 14 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis which include administrative services as well as General Governance, Community Development and Economic Development. 3.2 Fire and Paramedic Before Annexation Currently, the annexation area is in a State Responsibility Area (SRA), where CAL FIRE is responsible for fire and emergency response services. The area is also serviced by San Bernardino County Fire Station Number 2 (Devore Station). The proposed project is also located within the recently expanded boundary of the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD), Service Zone FP-5 which is a special tax zone for funding fire protection and EMS. The current annual special tax for property in Service Zone FP-5 is estimated at $157.26 per parcel. The tax includes an annual inflationary factor up to a maximum of 3 percent. No water facilities are available to serve fire protection in the project area. After Annexation The City of San Bernardino has annexed their fire protection services to the SBCFPD. Therefore, the SBCFPD, Service Zone FP-5 will be the service provider for fire prevention, fire protection and emergency medical services (EMS) after annexation. Most of the existing City fire stations and equipment are transferred to the SBCFPD; with existing Station 232 (City), located at 6065 Palm Avenue, being the closest (approximately 1 mile) to the Spring Trails project site, as shown in Figure 3-1. Water facilities for fire protection will be owned and operated by the San Bernardino Municipal Water Department. All water facilities, hydrants, and water systems for fire protection in the area shall meet the water flow demands and be installed prior to development. All previous agreed upon egress for the project site that has been approved in the Environmental Impact Report shall be in place prior to construction. This includes the primary and secondary egress outlets. 3.3 Sheriff/Police Before Annexation The San Bernardino County Sheriff-Coroner’s Department provides public safety services to the unincorporated areas. The County Sheriff operates from an office in the City of San Bernardino        Packet Page. 555 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 15 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 3-1 Fire Protection Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 3-1 Fire Protection Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Google Earth Pro        Packet Page. 556 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 16 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis at 655 East Third Street. The Sheriff’s Department and the City Police Department provide mutual backup services upon request within both the City and unincorporated areas. The California Highway Patrol in San Bernardino provides traffic patrol on State Highways within the unincorporated areas of the County. The Highway Patrol can also provide emergency response backup to the City Police and the County Sheriff upon request. After Annexation After the annexation, the City of San Bernardino Police Department will be providing the public safety services for Spring Trails and the rest of the annexed area. The area is served by a main police station, located at 710 North D Street, and four designated geographical patrol districts (Northwest, Northeast, Southwest, and Southeast). The project site belongs to patrol beat B1 in the Northwest Patrol District, as shown in Figure 3-2. The San Bernardino Police Department maintains a ratio of approximately one sworn officer for every 1,000 residents. The City Police Department operates under a mutual aid agreement with police agencies in the surrounding cities that allows use of up to fifty percent of adjacent agency resources upon request and for automatic response within zones of mutual aid. The California Highway Patrol in San Bernardino will continue to provide traffic patrol on State Highways within the unincorporated areas. 3.4 Library Before Annexation Currently, the existing household within the annexation area is served by the San Bernardino County Library system. However, the nearest County library, the Carter Branch Library is located at 2630 North Linden Drive in Rialto, and is a driving distance of about 12.2 miles away from the annexation area. After Annexation The Howard M. Rowe Branch Library facility is a branch of the San Bernardino City Library system. Located at 108 East Marshall Boulevard in the City of San Bernardino, this branch is closest to the Spring Trails project site, with a driving distance of about 9.6 miles. The annexation area would continue to receive library services from the City of San Bernardino Branch library upon annexation.        Packet Page. 557 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 17 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 3-2 City of San Bernardino Police Department: Northwest District Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 3-2 City of San Bernardino Police Department: Northwest District Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Police Department 3.5 Parks and Recreation Before Annexation The County Regional Parks Department provides regional park services to all residents within the County, including unincorporated areas. The County Regional Parks system includes the following parks: Glen Helen, Yucaipa, Lake Gregory, Cucamonga, Guasti, and Prado. The closest regional park is Glen Helen Regional Park which has various recreation areas with amenities for fishing, boating, and picnicking. However, the County does not provide local park services, and, currently, there are no local parks within the annexation area. PROJECT SITE Site        Packet Page. 558 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 18 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis After Annexation The City of San Bernardino General Plan indicates that there are a total of 52 developed parks and recreational facilities in the City. There are a variety of different types of parks, including: 19 neighborhood, 10 community, 17 mini-parks, 3 regional parks, and 3 special facilities. The parks contain a broad range of facilities; including children’s play equipment, tennis and volleyball courts, and athletic fields. The special facilities include community buildings and senior centers. Al Guhin Park, located at 3650 Little League Drive, is the closest City park to the annexation area (approximately 1.3 miles). The Spring Trails Specific Plan provides open spaces that are meant to function as recreational opportunities, buffers, visual landmarks and interconnecting trails. The facilities will consist of community trails, equestrian/pedestrian trails and hiking trails. The proposed parks include two dual-use neighborhood parks (meaning that the parks also serve as water detention basins), a dog park and a thematic garden park with amenities, as shown in Figure 3-3. Per Chapter 19.30 of the City of San Bernardino Subdivision Regulations, the City requires five acres of park and recreational land per 1,000 residents. The Spring Trails development plans to develop and reserve public parks, private parks, natural open space, and homeowner maintained open space, exceeding the City’s requirements. Two neighborhood parks are planned for Spring Trails, which would total 7.0 acres; they would also serve as water detention basins. However, parks and open space will be maintained by the Spring Trails Homeowner Association (HOA). 3.6 Animal Control Before Annexation Currently, the annexation area is serviced by the City of San Bernardino’s Animal Control on a contract basis. Animal Control operates under the San Bernardino Police Department and is responsible for animal licensing, dead animal pickup, loose animal investigations, animal shelter management, and other services. After Annexation The Animal Control Division of the San Bernardino Police Department will continue to provide services to the area after annexation.        Packet Page. 559 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 19 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 3-3 Spring Trails Specific Plan Trails, Parks, and Open Space Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 3-3 Spring Trails Specific Plan Parks, Trails, and Open Space Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Montecito Equities, Ltd., July 2013        Packet Page. 560 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 20 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis 3.7 Street Lighting Before Annexation Street lighting is a service provided to the area by Southern California Edison. However, the street lighting only extends to the southern border at Meyers Road, and no street lighting exists within the annexation area. After Annexation Upon annexation, street lighting within the project is maintained by a HOA. Outside the project area, on public right of ways, the City of San Bernardino Public Works Department is responsible for the maintenance provided by Southern California Edison. 3.8 Landscape Maintenance Before Annexation San Bernardino County provides road pavement and minimal landscaping maintenance. After Annexation Upon annexation and development, significant landscaping amenities will be added to the Spring Trails annexation area. Maintenance within the Specific Plan Area would be managed by the homeowners association (HOA). Figure 3-4 shows the landscape zones as presented in the Spring Trails Specific Plan. 3.9 Water Before Annexation Currently, public water facilities do not serve the proposed Spring Trail project. After Annexation Upon annexation, the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department (SBMWD) would provide water services to Spring Trails and currently provides service to pressure zones ranging from 1,249 feet to 2,300 feet. Spring Trails lies between the 2,300 to 3,000-foot pressure zones. The nearest existing reservoir is the Meyers Canyon Reservoir, which is within the 2,100-foot pressure zone, but is not adequate for buildout of Spring Trails or Verdemont Heights. Therefore, water will be supplied to Spring Trails from lower elevations by a combination of expanding and improving the offsite water system and the provision of onsite reservoirs and transmission lines.1 Figure 3-5 shows the conceptual water plan for Spring Trails. 1 Montecito Equities, Spring Trails Specific Plan, October 2012, p. 3-101        Packet Page. 561 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 21 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 3-4 Spring Trails Specific Plan Landscape Zones Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 3-4 Spring Trails Specific Plan Landscape Zones Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Montecito Equities, Ltd., July 2013        Packet Page. 562 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 22 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 3-5 Spring Trails Specific Plan Conceptual Water Plan Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis, City of San Bernardino 3-5 Spring Trails Specific Plan Conceptual Water Plan Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Montecito Equities, Ltd., July 2013        Packet Page. 563 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 23 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis 3.10 Wastewater Collection Before Annexation Sewer service to the project site is currently via septic tanks. After Annexation The Spring Trails project is within the City’s Public Works Department’s sanitary sewer service area. The City’s engineering sewer capacity study concluded that the existing sewer system has the capacity to accommodate the project. Beginning May 2017, operation and maintenance of the City’s wastewater collection system was transferred to the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department (SBMWD). As shown in Figure 3-6, Spring Trails would connect to the existing 10-inch sewer line located on Little League Drive, which connects to a major interceptor system to the south and is eventually treated in the San Bernardino Water Reclamation Plant operated by SBMWD. The only offsite improvement that may be required is North Little League Drive, which may be upgraded from an 8” to a 10” line depending upon the ultimate slope as determined in final engineering.2 3.11 Transportation Before Annexation Current transportation services for the annexation area include freeways and interchanges serviced by Caltrans; arterials and collectors serviced by the County Public Works Department; local roads also serviced by the Public Works Department of San Bernardino County; and public transit serviced by Omnitrans. The closest Omnitrans bus stop to the annexation area is at Kendall Drive and Palm Avenue with a driving distance of about 2.2 miles. After Annexation Caltrans and Omnitrans will continue to provide their services post annexation for arterials, collectors and public transit. All onsite street local roads will be maintained by a homeowners association. The developer will be responsible for improvements of all necessary public streets, both onsite and offsite, as shown in Figure 3-7. Upon annexation, the City becomes responsible for the regional transportation fee associated with the proposed project, which is included in the estimated City fees for the project in Chapter 4, Table 4-2. 2 Montecito Equities, Spring Trails Specific Plan, October 2012, p. 3-112        Packet Page. 564 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 24 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 3-6 Spring Trails Specific Plan Conceptual Sewer Plan Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 3-6 Spring Trails Specific Plan Conceptual Sewer Plan Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Montecito Equities, Ltd., July 2013        Packet Page. 565 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 25 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 3-7 Spring Trails Specific Plan Conceptual Circulation Plan Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 3-7 Spring Trails Specific Plan Conceptual Circulation Plan Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J.P. Weber Group, November 2016        Packet Page. 566 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 26 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis 3.12 Flood Control and Drainage Before Annexation The drainage area to which Spring Trails belongs flows into Cable Canyon, then into Cable Creek, then into Devil Creek Diversion Channel, then into Lytle Creek Wash and eventually into the Santa Ana River. Currently, there are no local flood control or drainage facilities in the annexation area. On a regional level, the San Bernardino County Flood Control District intercepts and manages flood flows through and away from developed areas throughout the County. The District is also responsible for water conservation and storm drain construction. After Annexation Upon annexation, flood control and drainage systems would be constructed by the developer and onsite flows would be managed and maintained by the HOA. The Spring Trails Specific Plan includes drainage improvements that collect and convey storm flows that would reduce the amount of storm runoff to levels prior to annexation and development, as shown in Figure 3-8. The existing Cable Canyon and Meyers Canyon drainage ways would remain relatively unchanged, except for necessary roadway and infrastructure improvements. Onsite and offsite stormwater flows would be collected and routed using catch basin inlets and storm drain systems that would carry water to three onsite detention basins, which also serve as parks. 3.13 Utilities Before and After Annexation Utilities include cable television, internet, telephone, electric power, and natural gas. Currently, Charter Communications is the cable television and internet service provider. Verizon maintains telephone service to the annexation area. Electricity is provided by Southern California Edison, while natural gas is supplied by the Southern California Gas Company. These service providers are not anticipated to change upon annexation. 3.14 Schools Before and After Annexation Public education in the City of San Bernardino is provided by San Bernardino City Unified School District (SBCUSD). SBCUSD is the eighth-largest public school district in California with over 54,379 students enrolled at 44 elementary schools, 10 middle schools, 8 high schools and 3 special education schools. Before the annexation, the SBCUSD served the unincorporated area.        Packet Page. 567 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 27 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 3-8 Spring Trails Specific Plan Conceptual Drainage Plan Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 3-8 Spring Trails Specific Plan Conceptual Drainage Plan Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Montecito Equities, Ltd., July 2013        Packet Page. 568 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 28 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis SBCUSD will continue to serve the existing development as well as any future development in the annexation with North Verdemont Elementary School (3555 West Meyers Road), Chavez Middle School (6650 North Magnolia Avenue), and Cajon High School (1200 Hill Drive), as shown in Figure 3-9. Palm Avenue Elementary School is also located near the annexation area at 6565 Palm Avenue. Figure 3-9 Local Elementary, Middle and High Schools San Bernardino City Unified School District City of San Bernardino 3-9 Local Elementary, Middle and High Schools Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 3.15 Solid Waste Management Before Annexation The current service provider of solid waste management for the annexation area is the San Bernardino County Department of Public Works’ Solid Waste Management Division, under the contract with Burrtec. The division oversees the operation and management of the County’s solid waste disposal system, which includes five regional landfills and nine transfer stations.        Packet Page. 569 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 29 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis After Annexation Solid waste collection within the City of San Bernardino and a portion of the unincorporated planning area is provided by Burrtec on a contract basis with the City. 3.16 Public Health and Welfare Before and After Annexation The San Bernardino County Department of Public Health currently serves the City for the general public’s health and welfare services. The department provides a variety of programs and services that informs and educates the public about health issues. The County Department of Public Health additionally provides public assistance welfare and healthcare needs for all residents within San Bernardino County. There are no anticipated changes in service levels or costs after the annexation of the proposed project.        Packet Page. 570 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 30 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 4 PAYING FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE 4.1 Spring Trails Facilities and Infrastructure One or more community facilities district(s) will be formed to pay for the cost of certain offsite public facilities necessary for the development of the Project, including roads and traffic improvements, parks and open space improvements, flood control and drainage systems, water and sewer systems, and utilities. A capital improvement plan, and rate and method of apportionment will be prepared which will outline the facilities cost, rates, and manner of collection. Table 4-1 presents the list of infrastructure improvements for the Spring Trails Specific Plan. The majority of the infrastructure will be constructed by the project’s master developer with interior neighborhood walls and fences constructed by merchant builders. Table 4-1 also identifies the jurisdiction, special district or private association responsible for maintenance of each facility and the ownership of each facility. The projected annual fiscal impacts to the City for provision of services to the Spring Trails project are presented in Chapter 5. 4.2 City of San Bernardino Development Impact Fees While the developer is responsible for constructing the facility and infrastructure improvements for the Spring Trails Specific Plan, the developer will also pay one-time development impact fees (DIF) to offset the additional public capital costs required of new development. If the developer constructs any facilities covered by DIFs, the developer will receive credit toward construction costs for an equivalent amount of DIF fees. As shown in Table 4-2, total one-time development impact fees for Spring Trails are estimated at about $7.2 million. Of the total estimated fees, about $4.9 million are estimated for the City and the remaining $2.3 million are estimated for the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department. The estimated City fees include the regional transportation fee that will become the responsibility of the City upon annexation of the project.        Packet Page. 571 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 31 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 4-1 Spring Trails Facilities and Infrastructure Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 4-1 Spring Trails Facilities and Infrastructure Type Developed By Maintained By 1 Owned By 1 Streetscape Primary and Secondary Offsite Entry Roads CFD City City Onsite Roads and Cul-de-sacs Master Developer HOA HOA Onsite Entry Features/Landscaping Master Developer HOA HOA Onsite Street Lighting Master Developer HOA HOA Onsite Community Walls and Fences Master Developer HOA HOA Interior Neighborhood Walls and Fence Guest Builder Homeowner Homeowner Parks and Open Space Onsite Parks and Open Space Master Developer HOA HOA Offsite Parks CFD City City Onsite Detention Basins Master Developer HOA HOA Cable Creek and Meyers Open Space Areas Master Developer HOA City Fuel Modification Zone A Master Developer HOA/Homeowner Homeowner Fuel Modification Zones B and C Master Developer HOA HOA/Homeowner Infrastructure Drainage Systems (offsite) CFD City City Drainage Systems (onsite) CFD HOA HOA Sewer Systems (onsite and offsite)CFD SBMWD SBMWD Water Systems (onsite and offsite)CFD SBMWD SBMWD Nonpotable Water Systems (onsite and offsite)CFD SBMWD SBMWD 1. LLMD = Landscape and Lighting District or special maintenance district HOA = Homeowners' Association (Master or Neighborhood) SBMWD = San Bernardino Municipal Water Department Certain facilities and improvements may be subject to reimbursement agreements. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Gresham Savage Nolan & Tilden, PC, April 7, 2017 San Bernardino Municipal Water Department        Packet Page. 572 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 32 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 4-2 Summary of Spring Trails City Development Impact Fees Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) 4-2 Summary of Spring Trails Development Impact Fees Estimated Development Fees Development Impact Fee Category 1 Amount Impact Fees New Residential Units 215 Fee per Unit City Fees 2 Community Development Fees Aquatic Facilities $326 $70,114 Cultural Development $3,000 $645,000 Library Facilities $638 $137,146 Public Meeting Facilities $1,090 $234,251 Parkland and Open Space $9,518 $2,046,340 Subtotal $14,571 $3,132,851 Public Safety Fees Law Enforcement $639 $137,400 Subtotal $639 $137,400 Engineering Fees Local Circulation Systems $233 $50,082 Regional Circulation Systems $2,435 $523,525 Storm Drain $3,926 $844,071 Verdemont (Chestnut Drainage Fee -- $0.289/ sq. ft.)$957 $205,712 Verdemont (Palm Box Culvert/ Signal -- $0.022/ sq. ft.)$74 $15,824 Subtotal $7,624 $1,639,214 Total City Fees $22,835 $4,909,465 Water & Sewer - City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department (SBMWD) 4 Sewer Capacity $3,500 $752,500 Water Connection (3/4" x 3/4")$7,110 $1,528,650 Total SBMWD Fees $10,610 $2,281,150 TOTAL FEES $33,445 $7,190,615 1. Note that the analysis does not include engineering processing fees, applicable fee credits, potential CFD/AD proceeds or potential impact of a Development Agreement, Mitigation Agreement, SB 50 Agreement, or similar agreement. 2. Represents the applicable fees per the City of San Bernardino fee schedule cited below. Actual fee amounts may differ at the time of application for building permits or connection to services. 3. Upon annexation, payment of the regional circulation system fee which was the requirement of the County prior to annexation will transfer to the City. As shown above, the regional circulation fee is estimated at $523,525 for the project. 4. Represents the applicable water fees per the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department. (Note that per the Conditions of Approval, upgrades and construction of new water and sewer system facilities will need to be completed in order for the Water Department to be able to serve the Tract, i.e. booster pump stations, 2,300 ft. level reservoir, etc.) Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Land Development Division Impact Fees, Effective February 15, 2022 (Accessed 8/2023)        Packet Page. 573 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 33 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis 4.3 Schools There is a one-time School Impact Fee of $4.31 per square foot for new, single-family residential development in the City of San Bernardino. At an average of 3,200 square feet of living space per new, single-family residential unit, the cost per unit is estimated to be $13,792. With a total of 215 residential units, the estimated school impact fee for the Spring Trails development totals approximately $3.0 million. 4.4 Utilities Cable television, internet, power, and gas utilities are enterprise services, where fees are determined by each company’s rate structure. 4.5 Roads and Drainage The local circulation systems fee is $233 per unit, while the regional circulation systems fee is $2,435 per unit, as shown in Table 4-2. With 215 units, local and regional fees would total $573,607 for the development. 4.6 Water and Sewer The developer is responsible for funding their share of the required water and sewer facilities to include, but not limited to reservoirs, booster stations, and transmission mains. Once the major facilities are complete and conveyed to the San Bernardino Municipal Water Department (SBMWD) for operation to serve water to the new pressure zones, the developer is then responsible to construct distribution facilities to provide water and sewer to the proposed housing in the project.        Packet Page. 574 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 34 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 5 FISCAL IMPACTS This chapter describes the fiscal analysis of the Spring Trails Specific Plan. Fiscal impacts are first presented to the City of San Bernardino General Fund followed by the projected recurring revenues to the City’s Gas Tax Fund and the City’s Measure I Fund. Fiscal impacts are shown in constant 2018 dollars with no adjustment for possible future inflation. 5.1 City General Fund A recurring surplus of $37,705 is projected to the City General Fund for the Spring Trails Annexation after buildout, as shown in Table 5-1. The projected surplus after buildout is based on recurring revenues of about $493,179 and recurring costs of about $455,474. This projection includes assumed revenues from the recently adopted CFD 2018-1 tax for safety services. The revenue-to-cost ratio is estimated at about 1.08 after buildout. A small surplus of $827 is projected for Year 1, which is planned for onsite grading and offsite infrastructure capital improvements. With completion of new housing units in Year 2 (Phase 1), a surplus of $3,328 is projected. The projected surplus increases to $9,949 for Phase 2 (Year 3) and by Phase 3 (Year 4) a surplus of $20,351 is projected. When the final units are developed in Phase 4 (Year 5), the projected surplus to the General Fund is $37,705. Table 5-1 Summary of Projected General Fund Recurring Fiscal Impacts Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) 5-1 Summary of Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts Year 1 - 2026 Year 2 - 2027 Year 3 - 2028 Year 4 - 2029 Year 5 - 2030 Existing Buildout Unit New Units New Units New Units of New Units General Fund (Grading)(Phase 1)(Phase 2)(Phase 3)(Phase 4) Estimated Annual Recurring Revenues $2,719 $66,413 $178,387 $311,172 $493,179 Estimated Annual Recurring Costs $1,892 $63,085 $168,438 $290,822 $455,474 Estimated Annual Recurring Surplus $827 $3,328 $9,949 $20,351 $37,705 Estimated Annual Revenue/Cost Ratio 1.44 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J. P. Weber Group, September 2023        Packet Page. 575 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 35 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis General Fund Projected Recurring Revenues Projected property tax in lieu of vehicle license fees, CFD 2018-1 (safety services) taxes and off- site sales tax account for about 65 percent of the total projected General Fund revenues after buildout, as shown in the detailed projected fiscal impacts in Table 5-2. General Fund Projected Recurring Costs As also shown in Table 5-2, police protection and general government account for about 76 percent of total projected recurring General Fund costs for the project after buildout. Table 5-2 Detailed General Fund Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) 5-2 Detailed General Fund Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts Year 1 - 2026 Year 2 - 2027 Year 3 - 2028 Year 4 - 2029 Year 5 - 2030 Existing Buildout Unit New Units New Units New Units of New Units Percent General Fund (Grading)(Phase 1)(Phase 2)(Phase 3)(Phase 4)of Buildout Estimated Recurring Revenues Property tax 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Property tax in lieu of VLF 0 20,303 55,774 97,462 154,253 31.3% Off-site retail sales and use tax 927 9,009 23,129 39,724 62,332 12.6% Measure S - sales tax 853 8,288 21,279 36,546 57,345 11.6% Franchise tax 126 4,215 11,254 19,431 30,432 6.2% CFD 2018-1 (safety services) 2 416 12,992 36,032 64,641 105,224 21.3% Charges for current services 31 1,033 2,758 4,762 7,458 1.5% Fines and forfeitures 13 432 1,153 1,992 3,119 0.6% Intergovernmental revenues 17 579 1,546 2,669 4,180 0.8% Miscellaneous revenues 13 428 1,143 1,973 3,090 0.6% Tow franchise revenues 7 217 579 1,000 1,567 0.3% Property transfer tax-turnover 69 667 1,712 2,940 4,613 0.9% Sales tax - public safety 17 582 1,554 2,683 4,202 0.9% Utility user tax 230 7,668 20,474 35,349 55,363 11.2% Total Projected Revenues $2,719 $66,413 $178,387 $311,172 $493,179 100.0% Estimated Recurring Costs Economic and housing development $18 $615 $1,642 $2,835 $4,440 1.0% Police protection 1,142 38,071 101,650 175,507 274,873 60.3% Parks, recreation and community services 62 2,059 5,498 9,492 14,866 3.3% Public works' services 285 9,507 25,384 43,827 68,641 15.1% Transfer to Animal Control Fund 45 1,514 4,042 6,980 10,931 2.4% Library 35 1,180 3,151 5,440 8,520 1.9% General government - O&M/contracts 106 3,523 9,406 16,241 25,436 5.6% General government - overhead 198 6,616 17,665 30,500 47,768 10.5% Total Recurring Costs $1,892 $63,085 $168,438 $290,822 $455,474 100.0% Estimated Net Recurring Surplus $827 $3,328 $9,949 $20,351 $37,705 Estimated Revenue/Cost Ratio 1.44 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1. Based on information from the City Finance Director, per the agreement between the City and the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) the City will not receive any of the basic one percent property tax upon annexation of the Spring Trails project. 2. The City formed CFD 2018-1 in October 2018 which levies a special tax to provide finances for a portion of ongoing citywide public safety services. The special tax is $385 per single family unit and $358 per multi-family unit effective July 1, 2019 through June 2024. Beginning July 1, 2024, these rates will increase by four percent each following July 1. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Finance Director J. P. Weber Group, September 2023        Packet Page. 576 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 36 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis 5.2 Other Funds Fund 126 – Gas Tax As shown in Panel A of Table 5-3, recurring Gas Tax Fund revenues to the City are projected at $16,122 for the Spring Trails project after buildout. These revenues are earmarked for transportation related expenditures. Fund 129 – Measure I Measure I includes a ½ cent sales tax for transportation expenditures. Recurring Measure I revenues are projected at $5,949 after buildout, as shown in Panel B of Table 5-3. Table 5-3 Summary of Projected Other Funds Recurring Revenues Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) 5-3 Summary of Projected Other Funds Recurring Revenues Year 1 - 2026 Year 2 - 2027 Year 3 - 2028 Year 4 - 2029 Year 5 - 2030 Existing Buildout Unit New Units New Units New Units of New Units Other Funds (Grading)(Phase 1)(Phase 2)(Phase 3)(Phase 4) A. Fund 126 - Gas Tax 1 Annual Recurring Gasoline Tax $67 $2,233 $5,962 $10,294 $16,122 B. Fund 129 - Measure I 1 1/2 cent sales and road tax $88 $860 $2,207 $3,791 $5,949 1. Annual recurring gasoline tax and Measure I revenues are restricted to street related expenditures. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J. P. Weber Group, September 2023        Packet Page. 577 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 37 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 6 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO FISCAL ASSUMPTIONS This Chapter presents the revenue and cost assumptions for projecting the ongoing operations and maintenance costs to the City General Fund and related City Funds for the Spring Trails annexation into the City of San Bernardino. As discussed earlier, the annexation area is currently located in the unincorporated area of San Bernardino County, within the existing sphere of influence of the City of San Bernardino. The general City demographic and economic assumptions used for calculating fiscal factors are first presented. The assumptions for projecting recurring revenues are then presented followed by the assumptions for projecting recurring costs. The fiscal factors are based on discussion with City finance staff and the City’s Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget. 6.1 City General Assumptions Fiscal impacts that are not based on valuation and taxable sales are generally projected based on a per capita, per employee, or per service population basis. Some fiscal impacts are projected based on other factors, such as per unit or per acre, based on the available data. General fund revenue and cost factors are estimated by dividing the FY 2022-23 budget categories by the City’s resident population, employment, total service population, or developed acres where appropriate. Table 6-1 provides the City’s general assumptions for this fiscal analysis. Population As shown in Table 6-1, the State Department of Finance (DOF) estimates the City of San Bernardino’s January 1, 2023, total population at 223,230. The City population estimate is used for projecting certain revenues and costs on a per capita basis, such as State subvened gas taxes. Housing Units DOF estimates 67,593 total housing units for the City of San Bernardino for January 1, 2023. DOF estimates that 64,905 units are occupied. Persons per Household The 2023 average persons per household for the City is estimated at 3.34 persons based on dividing the household population estimate of 216,854 by the 64,905 estimated occupied units.        Packet Page. 578 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 38 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 6-1 City Population, Housing and Employment Assumptions Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 6-1 City Population, Housing and Employment Assumptions Employment For fiscal factors that are impacted by only employment, such as business license taxes, the City’s total employment is used as the basis for calculating the factor. The total City employment of 112,478 for the year 2023 represents an interpolation of the years 2019 and 2035 from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2024 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), Preliminary Data. Assumption Description Population and Housing 1 216,854 Total Household Population 6,376 Group Quarters Population 223,230 Total Resident Population 43,315 Single Family Units 24,278 Multi-Family Units 67,593 Total Housing Units 64,905 Occupied Housing Units 3.34 Citywide Average Household Size Employment 112,478 Total City Employment 2 Service Population 3 223,230 Total Resident Population 56,239 Employment Weighted at 50% 279,469 Total Service Population Note: 1. Population and housing estimates are January 1, 2023 estimates provided by the California Department of Finance (DOF). 2. The total employment estimate for 2023 based on an interpolation of the 2019 and 2035 estimates from the Southern California Association of Governments, (SCAG) 2024 RTP preliminary estimates. 3. This analysis has weighted the employment at 50% to account for the estimated less frequent use of City services by employment versus population. Service population equals the total resident population plus the weighted employment. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. State of California, Department of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State - January 1, 2021-2023, Sacramento, May 2023 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), P reliiminary RTP 2024 Projecions Data        Packet Page. 579 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 39 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Service Population Fiscal factors that are impacted by both population and employment growth are estimated by allocating total budgeted revenues or costs to the estimated service population. Service population includes the City’s resident population plus 50 percent of the total estimated City employment. Employment is weighted at 50 percent to account for the estimated less frequent use of City services by employment versus population. As shown in Table 6-1, The City’s service population is estimated at 279,469 and represents the City’s estimated resident population of 223,230 plus 50 percent of the City’s estimated total employment, or 56,239 (50 percent of the total employment of 112,478). 6.2 City Revenue Assumptions The General Fund and Gas Tax Fund revenue factors that are used in preparing the fiscal analysis for the Spring Trails Specific Plan are presented in Table 6-2. These factors are based on the City’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 Adopted revenues for the General Fund and Other Funds shown in Appendix Table B-1 and Table B-2 and the City’s population, employment and service population estimates that are presented in Table 6-1. General Fund Property Taxes - General Fund. The San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) is now providing fire protection to the City. Based on the agreement between the City and the SBCFPD, the City will not receive a share of the 1.0 percent basic levy. The SBCFPD will receive the entire allocations that would have previously been allocated to the City. Property Tax In Lieu of Vehicle License Fees. Cities and counties began receiving additional property tax revenue to replace vehicle license fee (VLF) revenue that was lowered in 2004 when the state reduced the vehicle license tax. This property tax in lieu of VLF is projected to grow with the change in the citywide gross assessed valuation (AV) of taxable property from the prior year. As shown in Appendix Table B-3, the property tax in lieu of VLF in the City is projected to increase at an average of $1,270 per million dollars of new assessed valuation (AV). This factor is based on the change in AV and the change in property tax in lieu of VLF in the City over the last 10 years.        Packet Page. 580 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 40 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 6-2 General Fund and Other Funds Recurring Revenue Factors Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) 6-2 General Fund and Other Funds Recurring Revenue Factors FY 2022-23 Adopted Revenue Source Budget Projection Basis 1 GENERAL FUND Property Taxes 2 n/a Case Study: Project Valuation 0.00%City general share of 1% levy Property Tax In Lieu VLF (PTVLF) 3 $22,500,000 Case Study $1,270 per $1,000,000 assessed valuation 73.5%of PTVLF allocated to General Fund Sales and Use Tax $50,000,000 Taxable Sales 100% of 1% of projected sales and use tax Use Tax Factor Use Tax as Percent of Sales Tax 14.9%of sales tax Measure S - Sales Tax 4 $46,000,000 Case Study $920.00 per $1,000 of sales and use tax Franchise Taxes $11,781,000 Service Population = 279,469 $42.15 per service population CFD 2018-1 (Safety Services) 5 n/a Residential Units $400 per single family unit $372 per multi-family unit Charges for Current Services $2,305,500 Population = 223,230 $10.33 per capita Fines and Forfeitures $1,206,500 Service Population = 279,469 $4.32 per service population Intergovernmental Revenues $1,292,000 Population = 223,230 $5.79 per capita Business Registration $8,000,000 Employment =112,478 $71.13 per employee Miscellaneous Revenues $1,196,556 Service Population = 279,469 $4.28 per service population Tow Franchise $606,000 Service Population = 279,469 $2.17 per service population Property Transfer Tax $1,100,000 Property turnover 5.0%Residential turnover rate and valuation assumptions $0.55 per $1,000 assessed valuation Sales Tax - Public Safety $1,300,000 Population = 223,230 $5.82 per capita Utility User Tax $21,430,500 Service Population = 279,469 $76.68 per service population GAS TAX FUND 126 State gasoline tax $4,985,468 Population = 223,230 $22.33 per capita MEASURE I FUND 129 1/2% sales tax $4,772,000 City Sales and Use Tax =$50,000,000 $95.44 per $1,000 City sales and use tax 1. For fiscal factors that are based on population and employment, an estimated service population factor is applied, which represents the total population plus 50% of the total employment estimate. 2. Based on information from the City Finance Director, at this time the City General Fund will not receive any of the one percent basic property tax levy on the property's assessed valuation because of the property tax exchange agreement between the City and the County Fire Protection District. The County Fire Protection District now provides fire protection to the City. 3. The State has lowered the VLF rate, which reduces the amount of VLF received by cities and counties. However, the State is providing property taxes to offset the VLF reduction. VLF is estimated to change according to the City's increased in assessed valuation, as shown in Appendix Table B-3. Based on the property tax agreement between the City and the County Fire Protection District, the City will receive 73.5 percent of the projected property tax in lieu of VLF from the project. 4. The City enacted Measure S in 2006 which is a 0.25 percent sales tax and increased to 1 percent in 2020 by voters. 5. The City formed Community Facilities District (CFD) 2018-1 in October 2018 which levies a special tax to provide finances for a portion of ongoing citywide public safety services. The special tax is $385 per single family unit and $358 per multi-family unit effective July 1, 2019 through June 2024. Beginning July 1, 2024, these rates will increase by four percent each following July 1. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget City of San Bernardino, Finance Director State of California, Department of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State - January 1, 2021-2023, Sacramento, May 2023 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), Preliiminary RTP 2024 Projecions Data J. P. Weber Group, September 2023 Projection Factor        Packet Page. 581 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 41 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis The City receives property tax in-lieu of VLF based on the change in its gross assessed valuation of taxable property for new development in the annexed area. Per State law, the existing valuation in an annexing area cannot be used in adjusting the base amount of assessed valuation in the annexing City. However, based on the agreement between the City and the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District the City will receive only 73.5 percent of the projected property tax in lieu of VLF. Sales and Use Tax. Sales tax revenues to the local jurisdiction are projected at one percent of taxable sales. The City receives one percent of the taxable sales of most goods occurring within City limits. In addition to sales tax revenue, the City receives revenues from use tax, which is levied on shipments into the state and on construction materials for new development not allocated to a situs location. Use tax is allocated by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) based on each jurisdiction's proportion of countywide and statewide direct taxable sales. Use tax revenues to the City of San Bernardino are estimated at an additional 14.9 percent of point-of-sale sales tax, as shown in Appendix Table B-4. Half-year 2022 sales tax data provided obtained from CDTFA estimates that $3,549,772 of total sales and use tax were made from levies designated as use tax and the remaining $23,826,715 of the sales and use tax was point-of-sale sales tax. Therefore, use tax revenues to the City of San Bernardino are estimated at an additional 14.9 percent of point-of-sale sales tax. Measure S – Sales Tax. As shown in Table 6-2, Measure Z sales tax is projected at $920 per $1,000 of City sales and use tax. This tax is an additional component of sales and use tax that established an additional 0.25 percent sales tax that took effect in 2007. Measure S was increased to 1 percent sales tax by voters in 2020. Based on discussion with the City’s finance director, this revenue is assumed for the fiscal analysis. Franchise Taxes. Franchise taxes are projected at $42.15 per service population based on FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget revenues of $11,781,000 and the service population estimate of 279,469. City franchise taxes are collected for providers of cable, electric, gas, and telephone. Community Facilities District (CFD) 2018-1 (Safety Services). The City formed CFD 2018-1 In October 2018 which levies a special tax to provide financing for a portion of ongoing public safety services. The special tax is $385 per single family unit and $358 per multi-family unit.        Packet Page. 582 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 42 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Collection of the fee began July 1, 2019 and remain at the current rate for five years. Beginning July 1, 2024, these rates will increase by four percent and by four percent each following July 1. Charges for Current Services. Based on estimated FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget recurring revenues of $2,305,000 and the City’s population estimate, charges for current services are projected at $10.33 per capita. These revenues do not include one-time fees and charges, as shown in Appendix Table B-1. Fines and Forfeitures. These revenues include vehicle code fines, parking citations and other fines and penalties, and are projected at $4.32 per service population based on estimated FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget revenues of $1,206,500 and the City’s service population of 279,469. Intergovernmental Revenues. As shown in Table 6-2, these revenues are projected at $5.79 per capita based on estimated FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget revenues of $1,292,000 and the City’s population estimate of 223,230. Business Registration. These revenues are not projected for the proposed residential Spring Trails project because there is no employment projected for the project. Miscellaneous Revenue. These revenues are projected at $4.28 per service population based on estimated FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget recurring revenues of $1,196,556 and the City’s service population estimate of 279,469. Water Fund contributions for administrative services are included in this category. Revenues that are generated on a one-time basis and revenues that are not directly generated by the project are not included in this category. Tow Franchise. Tow franchise revenues are projected at $2.17 per service population based on FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget revenues of $606,000 and the service population of 279,469. Property Transfer Tax. Sales of real property are taxed by San Bernardino County at a rate of $1.10 per $1,000 of property value. For property located in the City, property transfer tax is divided equally between the City and the County, with the City receiving $0.55 per $1,000 of transferred property value. Based on the U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey for the period from 2015 to 2021, residential development in the City of San Bernardino is estimated to change ownership at an average rate of about 5.0 percent per year (Appendix Table B-5).        Packet Page. 583 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 43 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Sales Tax – Public Safety. These revenues are projected at $5.82 per capita based on the City FY 2022-23 Adopted revenue amount of $1,300,000 and the population estimate of 223,230. Utility User Tax. The City of San Bernardino levies a utility user tax on the users of cable, natural gas, electricity and telephone services within the City. Based on the City FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget revenue amount of $21,430,500 and the City’s estimated service population of 279,469, utility user taxes are projected at $76.68 per service population. Gas Tax Fund 126 As shown in Table 6-2, total State gasoline tax revenues to the City are projected at $23.33 per capita based on estimated FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget revenues of $4,985,468 and the City’s total population estimate of 223,230. These revenues include appropriations the shown in Appendix Table B-2. These revenues are earmarked for road related expenditures. Measure I Fund 129 Measure I includes is a ½ cent sales tax. As shown in Table 6-2, total Measure I sales tax revenues to the City are projected at $95.44 per $1,000 of total sales and use tax. This factor is based on estimated FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget revenues of $4,772,000 for Measure I sales tax and the City’s total sales and use tax of $50,000,000. These revenues are earmarked for transportation related expenditures. 6.3 City Cost Assumptions The General Fund cost factors that are used in preparing the fiscal analysis for the Spring Trails Annexation are presented in Table 6-3. These factors are based on the City’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 Adopted Budget net expenditures shown in Table 6-3 and the City’s population and service population estimates that are presented in Table 6-1. City General Fund expenditures are projected for general government, or overhead functions; community development; police; parks, recreation and community services; public works; and transfers from the General Fund to the Animal Control Fund and to Library services. Water and sewer operations are assumed to not impact the General Fund because they are enterprise functions and maintenance costs are assumed to be covered through the payment of user fees and charges. Fire protection to the City is provided by the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District, and these costs are not included in this analysis.        Packet Page. 584 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 44 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 6-3 General Fund Recurring Cost Factors Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) 6-3 General Fund Recurring Cost Factors General Government General government costs include administration and support of the departmental functions. General government costs for City of San Bernardino include Mayor, City Council, City Clerk, City Attorney, City Manager, Human Resources, Finance, Benefits, Dues and Subscriptions and Debt Service. These are generalized citywide services and can’t be directly linked to a specific department or project. As shown in Table 6-4, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget general government costs are estimated at $19,345,530 and direct departmental costs (or non-general government) are estimated at $165,117,929. Average general government costs are projected at about 11.7 percent of direct non-general government costs. FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget Cost Category Total Net Projection Basis 1 Cost Factor 1 General Government - Overhead $19,345,530 $19,345,530 Share of Line Costs 11.7%of direct department costs General Government - Operations and Maintenance (O&M)/Contracts $9,846,601 $9,846,601 Service Population = 279,469 $35.23 per service population Community and Economic Devevelopment 2 $11,698,803 $1,719,303 Service Population = 279,469 $6.15 per service population Police Protection $106,395,588 $106,395,588 Service Population = 279,469 $380.71 per service population Parks, Recreation and Community Services $4,596,710 $4,596,710 Population = 223,230 $20.59 per capita Public Works Services $26,567,943 $26,567,943 Service Population = 279,469 $95.07 per service population Transfer to Animal Control Fund $3,378,783 $3,378,783 Population = 223,230 $15.14 per capita Library $2,633,501 $2,633,501 Population = 223,230 $11.80 per capita 1. For fiscal factors that are based on population and employment, an estimated service population factor is applied, which represents the total population plus 50% of the total employment estimate. 2. Net community and economic development services costs are calculated from budgeted costs minus projected one-time charges for services revenues, license revenues and permit revenues that offset the budgeted costs, as shown in Table B-6. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget City of San Bernardino, Finance Director State of California, Department of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State - January 1, 2021-2023, Sacramento, California, May 2023 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), 2024 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), Preliminary Data.        Packet Page. 585 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 45 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 6-4 Calculation of City General Government Overhead Rate Spring Trails Specific Plan Fiscal Analysis, City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) 6-4 Calculation of City General Government Overhead Rate General Government – Operations and Maintenance (O&M)/Contracts About $9,846,601 of General Fund expenditures are for operations and maintenance contracts. Based on this amount and the City’s estimated service population of 279,469, these costs are projected at $35.23 per service population, as shown in Table 6-3. FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget General Fund Expenditures Total General Government Non-General Government General Government Mayor $377,224 $377,224 City Council 931,882 931,882 City Clerk 1,486,807 1,486,807 City Attorney 3,176,084 3,176,084 City Manager 2,331,558 2,331,558 Human Resources 2,508,177 2,508,177 Finance 6,000,647 6,000,647 General Government: Transfer to Animal Control 3,378,783 3,378,783 Net Personnel 45,090 45,090 Dues and Subscriptions 122,953 122,953 Maintenance and Operations/Contractual 9,846,601 9,846,601 Debt Service 2,365,108 2,365,108 General Government Subtotal 15,758,535 Non-General Government Community & Economic Development $11,698,803 $11,698,803 Police 106,395,588 106,395,588 Parks, Recreation and Community Services 4,596,710 4,596,710 Public Works 26,567,943 26,567,943 Library 2,633,501 2,633,501 GRAND TOTAL GENERAL FUND $184,463,459 $19,345,530 $165,117,929 Current General Government Overhead Rate General Government Expenditures $19,345,530 divided by Direct General Fund Expenditures $165,117,929 equals Current General Government Overhead Rate 11.7% Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget City of San Bernardino, Finance Director        Packet Page. 586 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 46 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Community and Economic Development As also shown in Table 6-3, Community and Economic Development costs are projected on net cost basis. Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget Community and Economic Development costs of $11,698,803 are offset by one-time development related permit and fee revenues, as shown in Appendix Table B-6, to result in net costs of $1,719,303. This divided by the service population of 279,469 results in $6.15 per service population. Police Department Based on expenditures of $106,395,588 in the FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget budget, and the City’s service population estimate of 279,469, police costs are projected at $380.71 per service population. As discussed in Chapter 3, the San Bernardino Police Department maintains a ratio of approximately one sworn officer for every 1,000 residents. The annexation area will be served by a main police station, located at 710 North D Street. The project site belongs to patrol beat B1 in the Northwest Patrol District. Parks, Recreation and Community Services Citywide average annual costs for parks, recreation and community services are projected at $20.59 per capita based on the City’s FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget recurring costs for these services of $4,569,710 and the City’s population estimate of 223,230. Onsite parks, trails and open space will be maintained through a homeowners association. Public Works Services The Public Works Department maintains streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters; street signs, street trees, traffic signals, streetlights, storm drains and sewer main lines. The Department also works with the Police Department for the prevention and removal of graffiti and provides collection services for refuse, recyclables and green waste. Based on FY 2022-23 expenditures of $26,567,943 and the City’s service population estimate of 279,469, average costs for all General Fund Public Works services are projected at $95.07 per service population. All project onsite streets, drains and streetlights will be maintained through a homeowners association and a lighting/ landscaping maintenance district.        Packet Page. 587 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 47 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Transfer to Animal Control Fund Animal Control services are financed through a separate Animal Control Fund. Based on the City’s FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget General Fund transfers of $3,378,783 to the Animal Control Fund and the City’s population estimate of 223,230, these costs are projected at $15.14 per capita, as shown in Table 6-3. Library Fund Library services are also paid through a separate fund. Library service costs are projected at $11.80 per capita based on the City’s FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget General Fund transfers of $2,633,501 to the Library Fund and the City’s population estimate of 223,230.        Packet Page. 588 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 48 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis APPENDIX A SUPPORTING LAND USE TABLE Table A-1 Road, Drainage, Sewer. Parks, Trails and Open Space Phasing Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino A-1 Roads, Drainage, Sewer, Parks, Trails and Open Space Phasing Lane Miles Square Feet Lane Miles Square Feet Lane Miles Square Feet Primary Access Miles/Square Feet 1.04 153,216 0.19 25,188 Secondary Access Miles/Square Feet 2.61 344,789 0.08 10,254 Primary Local Miles/Square Feet 2.96 309,382 0.97 250,669 Secondary Local Miles/Square Feet 0.27 28,275 Cul-De-Sac I Miles/Square Feet 0.63 99,076 0.31 43,960 Cul-De-Sac II Miles/Square Feet 0.84 110,501 2.41 288,137 Total 3.65 498,005 4.70 554,401 3.96 611,041 Public Private Public Private Public Private Detention Basin Square Feet 298,277 178,392 Infiltration Trench Square Feet Reinforced Concrete Box Lineal Feet 1,430 2,286 Reinforced Concrete Pipe Lineal Feet 3,685 7,460 2,378 Arch Culvert Lineal Feet 580 Total Lineal Feet 5,695 9,746 2378 Phase 2 Public Private Public Private Public Private Sewer Main Lineal Feet 4,017 10,857 13,479 Public Private Public Private Open Space Acre 47.4 27 Graded Slopes Acre 25.18 9 12' Pedestrian/Equestrian Trail Lineal Feet 5,700 6,100 4' Hiking Trail Lineal Feet 4,600 2,700 Observation Point Each 3 3 Trailhead Each 2 1 Park Square Feet 57,331 landscaping. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J. P. Weber Group, October 2016 Roads 1 Road Type Unit of Measure Offsite Onsite (Private) Phase 1 Phase 2 Drainage (Basins, Storm Drain) 2 Facility Type Unit of Measure Offsite Onsite Phase 1 Phase 2 Sewer 3 Facility Type Unit of Measure Offsite Onsite Phase 1 Note: 1. All proposed offsite roads are assumed to be public maintained roads. Road sections are based on the proposed section on the Tentative Map exhibit. All roads are proposed as 2-lane roads. Lane miles are calculated by doubling the centerline length of a road segment. Road square footage is based on the entire road section, from R/W to R/W. 2. Detention basins are measured by square footage of the entire drainage lot. There are 2 basins in Phase 1 and 1 basin in Phase 2. Infiltration Parks, Trails and Open Space 4 Facility Type Unit of Measure Phase 1 Phase 2 trenches are as proposed in the project WQMP and Hydrology Report. RCB quantities are based on the length of the centerline of each cell within a multiple celled box culvert. Arch Culverts are assumed for the Secondary Access Road crossing of Cable Creek. Arch Culverts are also proposed for Street " and Street "DD" crossing of Cable Canyon. 3. Offsite sewer is from the tract boundary on Verdemont Drive to Little League Drive, and in Little League Drive to existing facilities as depicted on the proposed Tentative Map. 4. Parks, Trails and Open Space sections are based on the Trails, Parks, and Open Space Plan in the Spring Trails Specific Plan. Trail lengths are approximate based on the Trails, Parks, and Open Space Plan. Open Space is areas on the Tentative Map that is not impacted by any development activity, except trail grading. Graded Slopes are areas within the proposed open space lots that have proposed grading and        Packet Page. 589 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 49 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis APPENDIX B SUPPORTING FISCAL TABLES Table B-1 (page 1 of 2) General Fund Revenues, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) B-1 General Fund Adopted Revenues, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Revenue Category Total Non-Recurring 1 Not Projected 2 Projected Property Taxes Property Tax In Lieu of VLF $22,500,000 $0 $0 $22,500,000 Sales and Use Tax Sales and Use Tax $50,000,000 $0 $0 $50,000,000 Measure Z - Sales Tax Measure Z - Sales Tax $46,000,000 $0 $0 $46,000,000 Franchise Tax Franchise Tax - So Cal Edison $1,000,000 $0 $0 $1,000,000 Franchise Tax - So Cal Gas 550,000 0 0 550,000 Franchise Tax - Charter Cable TV 1,100,000 0 0 1,100,000 Franchise Tax - Verizon 120,000 0 0 120,000 Franchise Tax - AT&T (Pacific Bell)11,000 0 0 11,000 Franchise Tax - Burrtec Disposal 9,000,000 0 0 9,000,000 Total Franchise Taxes $11,781,000 $0 $0 $11,781,000 Charges For Services On Site Plan Check Fees $400,000 $400,000 $0 $0 Cannabis Permit Application Fee 0 0 0 0 Cannabis Permit Regulatory Fee 120,000 120,000 0 0 Passport Fees 40,000 0 0 40,000 Subdivision Filing Fee 130,000 130,000 0 0 Planning Development PR 600,000 600,000 0 0 Technology Fee Development Services 150,000 150,000 0 0 Plan Review 165,000 165,000 0 0 C&D Application Fee 7,500 7,500 0 0 Plan Check Fee - B&S 1,575,000 1,575,000 0 0 Plan Check Fee - Fire 0 0 0 0 Board Up/Demolition 400,000 400,000 0 0 CDBG Revenue 0 0 0 0 Pendency Release 4,000 0 4,000 0 Miscellaneous Police Receipts 1,000,000 0 0 1,000,000 Sale of Photos 1,500 0 0 1,500 Traffic Offender OTS Fee 105,000 0 0 105,000 Police Tow Release 525,000 0 0 525,000 Private Property Tow Fee 150,000 0 0 150,000 Fingerprint Fee 3,500 0 0 3,500 Property Auction 2,500 0 0 2,500 False Alarm Fee 50,000 0 0 50,000 Vehicle Repossession Fee 5,000 0 0 5,000 Investigation Fee 5,000 0 0 5,000 Fireworks Enforcement 80,000 0 0 80,000 Code SFIF 1,000 1,000 0 0 Administrative Citations SFRPIP 50,000 50,000 0 0 Payoff Demand Fee 5,000 5,000 0 0 Crime Free Rental Housing 135,000 0 135,000 0 Cemetery Burial Fee 10,000 0 0 10,000 Sale of Cemetery Vaults and Liners 2,000 0 0 2,000 Blanket Inspection Fee 225,000 225,000 0 0 Miscellaneous Engineering Receipt 50,000 50,000 0 0 Plan Check Fee - Engineering 1,500,000 1,500,000 0 0 Archival Fee - Development Services 30,000 30,000 0 0 NPDES Storm Drain Utility Fee 175,000 175,000 0 0 NPDES Inspection Fee 25,000 25,000 0 0 Weed Abatement Destruction 50,000 0 0 50,000 Program & Facility Use Fees 100,000 0 0 100,000 Park Energy Fee 8,000 0 0 8,000 Signal maint/energy 100,000 0 0 100,000 Class Registration Fee 18,000 0 0 18,000 Swimming Pool Fee 50,000 0 0 50,000 Burrtec Host Fee 325,000 325,000 0 0 Library Fines 4,000 4,000 0 0 Election Filing Fees 3,000 3,000 0 0 Sale of Vases 500 500 0 0 Non Resident Fee 500 500 0 0 Crime Prevention Revenue 400 400 0 0 Total Charges for Services $8,386,400 $5,941,900 $139,000 $2,305,500        Packet Page. 590 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 50 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table B-1 (page 2 of 2) General Fund Revenues, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) Revenue Category Total Non-Recurring 1 Not Projected 2 Projected Fines and Forfeitures General Fines $15,000 $0 $0 $15,000 Code Administration Citations 65,000 0 0 65,000 Parking Citations 550,000 0 0 550,000 General Administrative Civil Penalty 125,000 0 0 125,000 Police Administrative Civil Penalty 0 0 0 0 PW Administrative Civil Penalty 0 0 0 0 Code Administrative Civil Penalty 450,000 0 0 450,000 Private Property Tow Fee 0 0 0 0 Library Fines 0 0 0 0 City Attorney Administrative Citations 1,500 0 0 1,500 Total Fines and Forfeitures $1,206,500 $0 $0 $1,206,500 Intergovernmental Motor Vehicle In Lieu Tax $130,000 $0 $0 $130,000 Other Governmental Agencies 2,051,260 0 2,051,260 0 State Aid - POST 35,000 0 0 35,000 State Mandated Cost Reimbursement 25,000 0 0 25,000 SBIAA Reimbursement 65,000 0 65,000 0 Recoverable Expense Income 1,100,000 0 0 1,100,000 San Manuel Community Credit 1,000,000 0 1,000,000 0 Water Reimbursement 2,000 0 0 2,000 Total Intergovernmental $4,408,260 $0 $3,116,260 $1,292,000 Investment Income Land and Building Rental/Lease $525,000 $0 $525,000 $0 ATS Land and Building Rental 0 0 0 0 Total Use of Money and Property $525,000 $0 $525,000 $0 Licenses and Permits Business Registration $8,000,000 $0 $0 $8,000,000 Miscellaneous Planning Permits 12,000 12,000 0 0 Annual Alarm Permits 50,000 50,000 0 0 Building Permits 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 0 Mechanical Permits 115,000 115,000 0 0 C&D Self Haul Permit 5,000 5,000 0 0 Street Cut Permits 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Licenses and Permits 350,000 350,000 0 0 Grading Permits 15,000 15,000 0 0 Public Works Construction Permits 380,000 380,000 0 0 On Site Permits 1,500,000 1,500,000 0 0 Mobile Home Park Permit 3,000 0 3,000 0 Total Licenses & Permits $12,427,000 $4,427,000 $0 $8,000,000 Miscellaneous Miscellaneous Planning Receipts $120,000 $0 $0 $120,000 Miscellaneous Library Receipts 10,000 0 0 10,000 Miscellaneous Receipts 175,000 0 0 175,000 Refunds and Rebates 0 0 0 0 Litigation Settlements 55,000 0 0 55,000 Restitutions 5,000 0 0 5,000 Water Fund Contributions 793,556 0 0 793,556 Vehicle Take Home Reimbursement 0 0 0 0 DUI Reimbursement 10,000 0 0 10,000 Off-Track Betting 28,000 0 0 28,000 Total Miscellaneous $1,196,556 $0 $0 $1,196,556 Other Taxes Tow Franchise 606,000 $0 $0 $606,000 Transient Occupancy Tax 4,650,000 0 0 4,650,000 Property Transfer Tax 1,100,000 0 0 1,100,000 Sales Tax - Public Safety 1,300,000 0 0 1,300,000 Cannabis Tax 4,000,000 0 0 4,000,000 Total Other Taxes $11,656,000 $0 $0 $11,656,000 Use of Money and Property Interest on Idle Cash $325,000 $0 $325,000 $0 Rental Income From Former EDA Properties 200,000 0 200,000 0 Vending Machine Commission 4,000 0 4,000 0 Total Use of Money and Property $529,000 $0 $529,000 $0 Utility Users Tax Utility Users Tax $21,430,500 $0 $0 $21,430,500 General Fund Total $192,046,216 $10,368,900 $4,309,260 $177,368,056 Note: 1. One-time development related fees are not projected as recurring revenues because they are netted from projected development development services costs. 2. Certain recurring revenues (such as transient occupancy tax, intergovernmental revenues and set payment amounts) that are not impacted by the proposed project are not projected in the fiscal analysis. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget        Packet Page. 591 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 51 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table B-2 Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget: Revenues for Other City Funds 1 Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) B-2 Revenues for Other City Fund, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Revenue Category Total Not Projected 2 Recurring Fund 124 - Animal Control Animal Licenses $205,000 $0 $205,000 Miscellaneous Licenses and Permits 2,000 0 2,000 General Fines 5,200 0 5,200 Animal License Penalty 13,250 0 13,250 Animal Adoption Fee 52,000 0 52,000 Contracted Shelter Fee 0 0 0 Apprehension Fee 10,500 0 10,500 Boarding Fee 30,000 0 30,000 Field Service Fee 5,000 0 5,000 Owner Release Fee 13,000 0 13,000 Vaccination Fee 35,000 0 35,000 Microchip Identification Fee 31,000 0 31,000 Miscellaneous Receipts 12,500 0 12,500 Transfers from General Fund 3,305,413 0 3,305,413 Intergovernmental 0 0 0 Total Animal Control Fund $3,719,863 $0 $3,719,863 Fund 126 - Gas Tax State Gasoline Tax: - HUTA Prop 42 Replacement (for Section 2103)$1,600,833 $0 $1,600,833 - Proposition 111 (Section 2105)1,175,980 0 1,175,980 - Section 2106 713,030 0 713,030 - Section 2107 1,495,625 0 1,495,625 Subtotal $4,985,468 $0 $4,985,468 - Section 2107.5 flat amount 3 9,532 0 9,532 Use of Money and Property 5,000 5,000 0 Total Gas Tax Fund $5,000,000 $5,000 $4,995,000 Fund 129 - Measure I 1/2 Cent Sales Tax $4,772,000 $0 $4,772,000 Federal Aid Street Construction 0 0 Subtotal $4,772,000 $0 $4,772,000 Interest on Idle Cash 28,000 28,000 0 Total Gas Tax Fund $4,800,000 $28,000 $4,772,000 1. This table includes only the special fund revenues that are projected in the fiscal analysis. 2. Revenues that are not impacted by the proposed project are not projected as recurring revenues. Also, revenues allocated to capital expenditures and interest on idle cash revenues are not projected. 3. Section 2107.5 gas tax revenues are allocated based on the population size-range population of the City. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget        Packet Page. 592 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 52 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table B-3 Estimated In Lieu Property Tax of Vehicle License Fees (VLF) Factor Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino B-3 Estimated In Lieu Property Tax of Vehicle License Fees (VLF) Factor Table B-4 Calculation of Use Tax Factor Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino B-4 Calculation of Use Tax Factor VLF - Assessed VLF per Fiscal Year Property Tax In Lieu 1 Valuation (AV) 2 $1,000,000 AV 3 2013-2014 $16,328,700 $10,695,499,230 $1,530 2014-2015 $17,249,209 $11,298,819,747 $1,530 2015-2016 $18,206,540 $11,924,444,131 $1,530 2016-2017 $17,844,545 $12,662,283,004 $1,410 2017-2018 $15,000,000 $13,395,373,121 $1,120 2018-2019 $15,800,000 $14,215,676,776 $1,110 2019-2020 $16,805,900 $15,437,323,990 $1,090 2020-2021 $18,316,742 $16,296,056,728 $1,120 2021-2022 $19,267,608 $17,611,502,086 $1,090 2022-2023 $22,500,000 $18,993,544,611 $1,180 Average of Ten Years $1,270 1. The property tax in lieu VLF amounts are from the City's budget as cited below . 2. City assessed valuation is from the County Assessor report as cited below. 3. Estimated VLF per $1,000,000 AV is rounded to the nearest tens. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Adopted Budgets, 2013-2014 through 2022-23. County of San Bernardino, Assessed Rolls, 2013 through 2023 City of San Bernardino Amount 1 Use Tax County Pool $3,539,112 State Pool $10,660 Total Use Tax $3,549,772 divided by Point-of-Sale $23,826,715 equals Use Tax Rate2 14.9% 1. Obtained from CDTFA data for Half-year 2022. 2. The use tax rate is the County Pool plus the State Pool divided by point-of-sale taxable sales tax. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, CDTFA, 2023        Packet Page. 593 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 53 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table B-5 Estimated Annual Residential Turnover Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino B-5 Estimated Annual Residential Turnover Occupied Housing Percent City of San Bernardino Units Turnover Total Owner Occupied Units 32,391 Moved in 2019 or later 5,241 Moved in 2015 to 2018 6,044 Total Moved 2015 to 2021 11,285 Estimated Annual Turnover Rate: 2015 to 2021 1 1,612 5% 1. The annual turnover rate is based on the assumption of seven years for the 2015 to 2021 period. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. U.S. Census Bureau, 2021 American Community Survey (ACS) 1-Year Estimate, Tenure by Year Householder Moved Into Unit, Report B25038, San Bernardino, California        Packet Page. 594 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 54 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table B-6 General Fund Net Community and Economic Development Cost Factor Spring Trails Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2023 Dollars) B-6 General Fund Net Community Development Cost Factor Category Amount Total General Fund Community and Economic Development Costs $11,698,803 minus Charges for Service On Site Plan Check Fees $400,000 Cannabis Permit Application Fee 0 Cannabis Permit Regulatory Fee 120,000 Subdivision Filing Fee 130,000 Planning Development PR 600,000 Technology Fee Development Services 150,000 Plan Review 165,000 C&D Application Fee 7,500 Plan Check Fee - B&S 1,575,000 Board Up/Demolition 400,000 Blanket Inspection Fee 225,000 Miscellaneous Engineering Receipt 50,000 Plan Check Fee - Engineering 1,500,000 Archival Fee - Development Services 30,000 NPDES Storm Drain Utility Fee 175,000 NPDES Inspection Fee 25,000 Total One-Time Charges for Service $5,552,500 minus One-Time Licenses and Permits Miscellaneous Planning Permits $12,000 Annual Alarm Permits $50,000 Building Permits 2,000,000 Mechanical Permits 115,000 C&D Self Haul Permit 5,000 Street Cut Permits 0 Miscellaneous Licenses and Permits 350,000 Grading Permits 15,000 Public Works Construction Permits 380,000 On Site Permits 1,500,000 Total One-Time Licenses and Permits $4,427,000 equals Recurring Net Community Development Costs $1,719,303 divided by City Service Population 279,469 equals Community Development Costs per Service Population $6.15 Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget City of San Bernardino, Finance Department        Packet Page. 595 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Spring Trails Annexation, City of San Bernardino October 10, 2023 55 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis APPENDIX C PROJECT REFERENCES City of San Bernardino www.sbcity.org/ Community and Economic Development Nathan Freeman, Director, 909.384.5357 Timothy O’Neal, Senior Management Analyst, 909.384.7276 Travis Martin, Associate Planner, 909.384.5313 Finance Department Marim Fam, Deputy Finance Director, 909.384.5242 Lisa Sherrick, Commissioner, Mayor’s Appointee Former Employees Rita Conrad, Former Interim Finance Director, 909.384.5242 Brent Mason, Former Finance Director, 909.384.5242 David Murray, Deputy Director/City Planner, 909.384.5567 Oliver Mujica, Former Planning Division Manager, 909.384.7272, ext. 3332 San Bernardino Municipal Water Department Ted Brunson, Development Services Manager, 909.453.6165 J.P. Weber Group Jeff Weber, Principal, 949.254.0135 Gresham Savage Nolan & Tilden, PC Mark Ostoich, Principal Shareholder, 909.890.4499 Jennifer Dorgan, 909.890.4499 Hinderliter de Llamas and Associates www.hdlcompanies.com San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission 909.388.0480 Samuel Martinez, Executive Officer www.sblafco.com County of San Bernardino www.sbcounty.gov/ San Bernardino City Unified School District Facilities/Operations Division, Facilities Management Takara Russ, Use of Facilities Senior Clerk, 909.388.1600 Omnitrans www.omnitrans.org/        Packet Page. 596 Resolution No. 2024-221 Resolution No. 2024-221 November 6, 20214 Page 1 of 7 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-221 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA, MAKING APPLICATION TO THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION FOR SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FOR REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND DETACHMENT FROM COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70, GENERALLY NORTHERLY OF MEYERS ROAD AND EASTERLY OF MARTIN RANCH ROAD (KNOWN AS THE 26-ACRE TOTALLY-SURROUNDED ISLAND) WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino desires to initiate proceedings pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Section 56000 et seq. of the California Government Code) for the annexation of unincorporated territory located in the Verdemont area, generally northerly of Meyers Road and easterly of Martin Ranch Road, more specifically described in Exhibit "C" and depicted on Exhibit "C-1", both made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the area proposed for reorganization is consistent with the Sphere of Influence of the City of San Bernardino; and WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino requests that the proposed reorganization be subject to the following terms and conditions: (a) the standard terms and conditions required by LAFCO shall apply; and (b) the annexation shall be subject to any and all of the City of San Bernardino's fees, taxes and special assessments as they currently exist or may exist at the completion of these proceedings; and WHEREAS, the reason for the proposed reorganization is to fulfill the requirement imposed by the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County to initiate the annexation of the totally-surrounded island area that would be created through the annexation of the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project; and WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino has reviewed the Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis (included as Exhibit D) prepared for the proposed reorganization; and WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino acknowledges and agrees to the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County’s requirement for imposing legal indemnification as outlined in Policy 3 of Chapter 2 of the Internal Operations, Accounting, and Financial Section of its Policy and Procedure Manual. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1.The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.        Packet Page. 597 Resolution No. 2024-221 Resolution No. 2024-221 November 6, 20214 Page 2 of 7 SECTION 2.Application is hereby made to the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County to initiate proceedings for the reorganization of unincorporated territory located in the Verdemont area, generally northerly of Meyers Road and Easterly of Martin Ranch Road, more specifically described and depicted in said Exhibit "C" and Exhibit "C-1", respectively, to be known as City of San Bernardino Annexation No. 364. SECTION 3.That the City Manager of the City of San Bernardino is hereby directed and authorized to execute, on behalf of said City, the application documents, including the certification of the Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis. SECTION 4.The City Clerk of the City of San Bernardino is hereby directed and authorized to file or cause to be filed, a certified copy of this resolution with the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County. SECTION 5.The City Manager of the City of San Bernardino is hereby directed and authorized to prepare and deliver, or cause to be prepared and delivered, all application documents including a certified Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis necessary for the initiation of proceedings for the proposed reorganization with the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County. SECTION 6.CEQA. As the decision-making body for the project, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the administrative record for the proposed project. Based upon the facts and information contained in the administrative record, including all written and oral evidence presented to the City Council, the City Council finds, as follows: (1) The administrative record has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City’s Local CEQA Guidelines. (2) The application for annexation is covered by the certified Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #2009111086) for the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project (Specific Plan No. SP 10-01; General Plan Amendment No. GPA 02-09, including pre-annexation of the Spring Trails site; Tentative Tract Map No. 15576 (Subdivision No. 02-09); and Development Agreement No. 11-01) approved February 19, 2013. No further environmental review is required for the project pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15162. (3) The determination of CEQA exemption reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. SECTION 7.Severability. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are declared to be severable. SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately.        Packet Page. 598 Resolution No. 2024-221 Resolution No. 2024-221 November 6, 20214 Page 3 of 7 APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 6th day of November 2024. Helen Tran, Mayor City of San Bernardino Attest: Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk Approved as to form: Sonia Carvalho, City Attorney        Packet Page. 599 Resolution No. 2024-221 Resolution No. 2024-221 November 6, 20214 Page 4 of 7 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) I, Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk, hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of Resolution No. 2024-221, adopted at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of November 2024 by the following vote: Council Members: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT SANCHEZ _____ _____ _______ _______ IBARRA _____ _____ _______ _______ FIGUEROA _____ _____ _______ _______ SHORETT _____ _____ _______ _______ REYNOSO _____ _____ _______ _______ CALVIN _____ _____ _______ _______ ALEXANDER _____ _____ _______ _______ WITNESS my hand and official seal of the City of San Bernardino this ___ day of ____________ 2024. Genoveva Rocha, CMC, City Clerk        Packet Page. 600 Resolution No. 2024-221 Resolution No. 2024-221 November 6, 20214 Page 5 of 7 EXHIBIT C LEGAL DESCRIPTION        Packet Page. 601 Resolution No. 2024-221 Resolution No. 2024-221 November 6, 20214 Page 6 of 7 EXHIBIT C-1 MAP        Packet Page. 602 Resolution No. 2024-221 Resolution No. 2024-221 November 6, 20214 Page 7 of 7 EXHIBIT D PLAN FOR SERVICE; FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS        Packet Page. 603 Page 1 of 3 LAFCO ***** - REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND TO SBCFPD ZONE FP-5 SAN BERNARDINO, AND DETACHMENT FROM COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70 (Spring Trails Specific Plan) Prepared January 11, 2023 Those parcels of land located in Section 35, Township 2 North, Range 5 West, San Bernardino Meridian, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Section 35, T. 2 N., R. 5 W., SBM; Course 1. Thence S88°21’49”W along the North line of said Section 35, T. 2 N., R. 5 W., SBM, a distance of 364.15 feet, to a point on the Muscupiabe Rancho Line, as per County Surveyors Plat 7093, Records of San Bernardino County, State of California; Course 2. Thence S08°23’37”W along said Muscupiabe Rancho Line, a distance of 2529.03 feet, to a point on the San Bernardino City limits, said point also being the Northwest corner of Government Lot 3 of Section 35, T. 2 N., R. 5 W., SBM; Course 3. Thence continuing S08°23’37”W along said Muscupiabe Rancho Line, a distance of 757.58 feet, to a point on the centerline of Pennsylvania Avenue as shown on the Plat of the Town of Irvington and the Land of Irvington Land and Water Co., recorded in Map Book 3, Page 9, Records of San Bernardino County, said point also being the Southwest corner of Government Lot 3 of Section 35, T. 2 N., R. 5 W., SBM, said point also being an angle point on City of San Bernardino Annexation #257, LAFCO No. 920, Ordinance No. 3131, effective date 02/18/1971; Course 4. Thence N62°54’32”W along said centerline of Pennsylvania Avenue and the border of City of San Bernardino Annexation #258, LAFCO No. 931, Ordinance No. 3142, effective date 03/05/1971, a distance of 560.57 feet, to a point on the east line of Lot “A” per Map Showing a Portion of the Meyer and Barclay Subdivision, recorded in Map Book 12, Page 18, Records of San Bernardino County; Course 5. Thence S05°57’38”E along said east line of Lot “A” and the border of said Annexation 258, a distance of 428.48 feet, to the Northeasterly corner of that certain 5 acres in the Southeast corner of said Lot “A”, as conveyed to Robert B. Meyer by deed recorded in book 173, page 156, of deeds, records of said County;        Packet Page. 604 Page 2 of 3 Course 6. Thence N83°59’22”W along the Northerly line of said 5 acres and the border of said Annexation 258, a distance of 590.94 feet; Course 7. Thence N86°44’09”W along the Northerly line of said 5 acres and the border of said Annexation 258, a distance of 52.61 feet, to a point on the centerline of Meyers Road as shown on Parcel Map No. 3540, recorded in Parcel Map Book 31, Page 84, Records of San Bernardino County; Course 8. Thence N51°36’40”W along said centerline of Meyers Road and the border of said Annexation 258, a distance of 543.37 feet, to its intersection with the prolongation of the easterly line of Parcel 1, Parcel Map No. 4093, recorded in Parcel Map Book 38, Page 53, Records of San Bernardino County, said point also being the Point of Beginning; Course 9. Thence continuing N51°36’40”W along said centerline of Meyers Road and the border of said Annexation 258, a distance of 916.19 feet, to its intersection with the prolongation of the westerly line of said Parcel 1; Course 10. Thence N22°56’09”E along said prolongation of the westerly line of Parcel 1 and along the westerly line of said Parcel 1 and along the westerly line of Parcel 2 of said Parcel Map No. 4093, a distance of 721.41 feet to an angle point on the boundary of said Parcel 2; Course 11. Thence N45°46’14”E along the westerly line of said Parcel 2 a distance of 469.27 feet; Course 12. Thence N27°05’29”E continuing along the westerly line of said Parcel 2, a distance of 17.00 feet to the northwesterly corner of said Parcel 2, said corner also being the southwesterly corner of Lot “D”, per Map Showing a Portion of the Meyer and Barclay Subdivision, recorded in Map Book 12, Page 18, Records of San Bernardino County; Course 13. Thence continuing N27°05’29”E along the westerly line of said Lot “D” a distance of 448.05 feet to the northwesterly corner of said Lot “D”, said point also being a point on the border of said Annexation 258; Course 14. Thence S57°15’54”E along the northerly line of said Lot “D” and said border of Annexation 258, a distance of 448.80 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot “D”; Course 15. Thence S15°53’55”W along the easterly line of said Lot “D”, a distance of 306.36 feet; Course 16. Thence S15°53’54”W along the easterly line of said Lot “D”, a distance of 30.01 feet to the southeast corner of said        Packet Page. 605 Page 3 of 3 Lot “D”; Course 17. Thence S15°44’02”W along the prolongation of the easterly line of said Parcel 2 of Parcel Map No. 4093, a distance of 30.01; Course 18. Thence S15°43’10”W along the easterly line of Parcel 2 and along the easterly line of said Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 4093 and along the prolongation of the easterly line of said Parcel 1, a distance of 1433.20 feet; Said parcel contains 26.84 acres more or less. Edward J. Bonadiman, P.L.S. DATE Exp. 12-31-23 2-13-24        Packet Page. 606 Exhibit C-1 LAFCO ****** - REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND TO SBCFPDZONE FP-5 SAN BERNARDINO, AND DETACHMENT FROM COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70 (SPRING TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN) SITE P.O.C.COURSE 1 VICINITY MAPN.T.S. Line TableLine #Direction Length 364.15' COURSE 1 COURSE 2 COURSE 3 COURSE 4 COURSE 5 COURSE 6 COURSE 7 COURSE 8 COURSE 9 S88°21'49"W GENERAL DESCRIPTIONS08°23'37"W 2529.03'S08°23'37"W N62°54'32"W S05°57'38"E N83°59'22"W N86°44'09"W N51°36'40"W N51°36'40"W 757.58' 560.57' 428.48' 590.94' 52.61' · COURSE 14 ·COURSE 13 COURSE 2COURSE 12 COURSE 15543.47' 916.19' 721.41' 469.27' 17.00' COURSE 16COURSE 11 LEGENDCOURSE 10 N22°56'09"E COURSE 11 N45°46'14"E COURSE 12 N27°05'29"E COURSE 13 N27°05'29"E COURSE 17 448.05' 448.80' 306.36' 30.01' COURSE 14 S57°15'54"E COURSE 10COURSE 15 S15°53'55"W COURSE 16 S15°53'54"W COURSE 17 S15°44'02"W 30.01'COURSE 18 S15°43'10"W 1433.20'COURSE 18 COURSE 9 COURSE 3P.O.B. LAFCO ***** COURSE 5 COURSE 7 LAFCO ***** - REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATIONTO THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND TO SBCFPDZONE FP-5 SAN BERNARDINO, AND DETACHMENT FROMCOUNTY SERVICE AREA 70 (SPRING TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN) COURSE 8 COURSE 4 COURSE 6 2-13-24 MONTECITO EQUITIES LTD D1 K.B.O. E.J.B. 1" = 300' 133952 300'0 300'600'900'1 1 SCALE: 1"= 300'DISREGARD PRINTS BEARINGEARLIER REVISION DATES 01-11-23        Packet Page. 607 11661 San Vicente Blvd. Suite 306 Los Angeles, California 90049-5111 310.820.2680-p www.stanleyrhoffman.com Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino Prepared for: City of San Bernardino 290 North D Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 909.384.7272 July 3, 2024 SRHA Job # 1408        Packet Page. 608 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 i Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CERTIFICATION The City of San Bernardino hereby certifies that this document presents the data and information required for the Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis for the Meyers Road Island Area Annexation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATE ____________ ___________ _ SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT ___________ _ TITLE OF APPLICANT City of San Bernardino, California        Packet Page. 609 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 ii Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CONTENTS Tables ...................................................................................................................................................... iv Figures ....................................................................................................................................................... v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... v CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose of the Study .................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Overview of the City of San Bernardino ....................................................................................... 3 1.3 Organization of the Report ........................................................................................................... 3 CHAPTER 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Residential Development ............................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Assessed Valuation and Property Tax ........................................................................................... 7 2.3 Sales and Use Tax ......................................................................................................................... 9 CHAPTER 3 PUBLIC FACILITIES BEFORE AND AFTER ANNEXATION ..................................................... 11 3.1 General Government .................................................................................................................. 12 3.2 Fire and Paramedic ..................................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Sheriff/Police .............................................................................................................................. 15 3.4 Library ......................................................................................................................................... 15 3.5 Parks and Recreation .................................................................................................................. 16 3.6 Animal Control ............................................................................................................................ 17 3.7 Street Lighting ............................................................................................................................ 17 3.8 Landscape Maintenance ............................................................................................................. 18 3.9 Water .......................................................................................................................................... 18 3.10 Wastewater Collection ............................................................................................................... 18 3.11 Transportation ............................................................................................................................ 19 3.12 Flood Control and Drainage ........................................................................................................ 19 3.13 Utilities ....................................................................................................................................... 20 3.14 Schools ........................................................................................................................................ 20 3.15 Solid Waste Management .......................................................................................................... 21 3.16 Public Health and Welfare .......................................................................................................... 21 CHAPTER 4 PAYING FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE .................................................. 22 4.1 Overview of Development Impact Fees ..................................................................................... 22 4.2 Schools ........................................................................................................................................ 22 4.3 Utilities ....................................................................................................................................... 22 4.4 Roads and Drainage .................................................................................................................... 22 4.5 Water and Sewer ........................................................................................................................ 22 CHAPTER 5 FISCAL IMPACTS ............................................................................................................. 24 5.1 City General Fund ....................................................................................................................... 24 5.2 Other Funds ................................................................................................................................ 26 CHAPTER 6 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO FISCAL ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................ 27 6.1 City General Assumptions .......................................................................................................... 27 6.2 City Revenue Assumptions ......................................................................................................... 29 6.3 City Cost Assumptions ................................................................................................................ 33 APPENDIX A NEIGHBORHOOD INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS .................................................. 38 APPENDIX B SUPPORTING FISCAL TABLES ......................................................................................... 39 APPENDIX C PROJECT REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 45        Packet Page. 610 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 iii Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis TABLES 1 Summary of Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts ....................................................................... vi 2 Summary of Projected Other Funds Recurring Revenues ........................................................ vii 2-1 Residential Development Description ....................................................................................... 7 2-2 Assessed Valuation and Property Tax ....................................................................................... 8 2-3 Estimated Existing Assessed Valuation ..................................................................................... 9 2-4 Estimated Offsite Sales and Use Tax by Project Residents ..................................................... 10 3-1 Current and Anticipated Service Providers in the Meyers Road Island Area Annexation ....... 12 4-1 Summary of City Development Impact Fees ........................................................................... 23 5-1 Summary of Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts ..................................................................... 24 5-2 Detailed General Fund Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts .................................................... 25 5-3 Summary of Projected Other Funds Recurring Revenues ....................................................... 26 6-1 City Population, Housing and Employment Assumptions ....................................................... 28 6-2 General Fund and Other Funds Recurring Revenue Factors ................................................... 30 6-3 General Fund Recurring Cost Factors ...................................................................................... 34 6-4 Calculation of City General Government Overhead Rate ....................................................... 35 A-1 Spring Trails Specific Plan, Roads, Drainage, Sewer, Parks, Trails and Open Space Phasing ... 38 B-1 General Fund Adopted Revenues, Fiscal Year 2022-23 ........................................................... 39 B-2 Revenues for Other City Fund, Fiscal Year 2022-23 ................................................................ 41 B-3 Estimated In Lieu Property Tax of Vehicle License Fees (VLF) Factor ..................................... 42 B-4 Calculation of Use Tax Factor .................................................................................................. 42 B-5 Estimated Annual Residential Turnover .................................................................................. 43 B-6 General Fund Net Community Development Cost Factor ....................................................... 44        Packet Page. 611 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 iv Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis FIGURES 1-1 Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Regional Vicinity ........................................................... 2 2-1 Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Local Vicinity ................................................................. 5 2-2 Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Parcels ........................................................................... 6 3-1 Fire Protection ........................................................................................................................ 14 3-2 City of San Bernardino Police Department: Northwest District .............................................. 16 3-3 Local Elementary, Middle and High Schools ........................................................................... 20        Packet Page. 612 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 v Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis report provides an assessment of public service delivery capabilities of the City of San Bernardino and other agencies, or special districts affected by the proposed annexation of the Meyers Road “Island Area” to the City of San Bernardino (the City). A commitment to annex the Island Area by the City was made a precondition by the San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for approving the City annexation of the Spring Trails specific plan located to the north-east of the Island Area. The specific plan’s annexation to the City would create an unincorporated county island (the Island Area), which is now being assessed for LAFCO approval in this study. This report is being submitted to the San Bernardino County LAFCO as a “Plan for Service” required by California Government Code Section 56653. Currently, the County of San Bernardino provides many services to the annexation area including fire and paramedic services, general government, development services, sheriff patrol, public library, regional parks and recreation, street lighting, transportation, flood control and drainage, and health and welfare. Public schools are provided by the San Bernardino Unified School District. After annexation, the City is anticipated to provide services including general government, community development, police protection, local parks and recreation, community services and public works’ services. The City has annexed into the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) and its Service Zone FP-5 for fire protection and emergency medical response services. Since the Island Area is already within SBCFPD and Service Zone FP-5, the SBCFPD will continue to be the service provider for fire protection and emergency medical services. The County of San Bernardino will continue to provide other services such as regional parks and recreation, regional flood control and drainage and health and welfare. Fiscal Impacts Based on an analysis of current service delivery capabilities, the City is equipped to handle additional demand from the proposed Island Area annexation comprising six parcels totaling 26.38 acres with four existing homes. No additional growth is assumed in the Island Area for the 5-year post-annexation analysis period required by LAFCO, which is presented in this study.        Packet Page. 613 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 vi Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Roads, drainage systems, lighting, and utilities will be maintained by the City. The San Bernardino Municipal Water Department will maintain the onsite and offsite water and sewer systems. This report explains the transfer of service requirements upon annexation, estimates development impact fees and other cost responsibilities. As required by LAFCO, this study analyzes and presents the fiscal impacts of the Island Area on the City General Fund and other funds for the first five years upon annexation. First year post- annexation is assumed to be 2026. General Fund. As shown in Table 1, projected recurring fiscal impacts to the City General Fund for the Island Area Annexation is shown to generate an extremely small deficit for all years. Projected deficit to the General Fund declines slightly from $2,756 in Year 1 upon annexation through $2,474 in Year 5. The calculation assumes revenues from the recently adopted CFD 2018-1 tax for safety services family unit, which increases over time. Other Funds. Projected recurring revenues for the Gas Tax Fund and Measure I Fund that are earmarked for street and road related expenditures are presented in Table 2. Gas Tax Fund. As shown in Panel A of Table 2, projected recurring gasoline revenues to the City are projected at $292 across all years. Measure I Fund. Projected recurring Measure I sales tax revenues to the City are projected at $89 across all years. Table 1 Summary of Projected General Fund Recurring Fiscal Impacts Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) 1 Summary of Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 General Fund 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Estimated Annual Recurring Revenues $5,456 $5,522 $5,591 $5,664 $5,738 Estimated Annual Recurring Costs $8,212 $8,211 $8,212 $8,212 $8,212 Estimated Annual Recurring Surplus ($2,756)($2,689)($2,620)($2,548)($2,474) Estimated Annual Revenue/Cost Ratio 0.66 0.67 0.68 0.69 0.70 Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.        Packet Page. 614 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 vii Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 2 Summary of Projected Other Funds Recurring Revenues Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) 2 Summary of Projected Other Funds Recurring Revenues Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Other Funds 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 A. Fund 126 - Gas Tax 1 Annual Recurring Gasoline Tax $292 $292 $292 $292 $292 B. Fund 129 - Measure I 1 1/2 cent sales and road tax $89 $89 $89 $89 $89 1. Annual recurring gasoline tax and Measure I revenues are restricted to street related expenditures. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.        Packet Page. 615 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 1 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The Meyers Road Island Area is in unincorporated San Bernardino County located on the northern edge of the City of San Bernardino in the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains, as shown in Figure 1.1. The annexation area is approximately 1.5 miles east of the unincorporated community of Devore and the junction of Interstate 215 (I-215) and I-15. The Island Area is bounded by the San Bernardino National Forest on three sides and the City of San Bernardino on the southern side. 1.1 Purpose of the Study The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) of the County of San Bernardino requires a jurisdiction to submit a Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis when the jurisdiction is affected by a proposed change in boundaries, formation, or organization. The annexation of the Island Area into the City requires the City to show that necessary infrastructure improvements and services can be provided to this area. Per the application form in the LAFCO Policy and Procedure Manual, Updated July 2023, the Plan for Service must include the following components: a. A description of the level and range of each service to be provided to the affected territory. b. An indication of when those services can feasibly be extended to the affected territory. c. An identification of any improvement or upgrading of structures, roads, water or sewer facilities, other infrastructure, or other conditions the affected agency would impose upon the affected territory. d. The Plan shall include a Fiscal Impact Analysis which shows the estimated cost of extending the service and a description of how the service or required improvements will be financed. The Fiscal Impact Analysis shall provide, at a minimum, a five (5)-year projection of revenues and expenditures. A narrative discussion of the sufficiency of revenues for anticipated service extensions and operations is required. e. An indication of whether the affected territory is, or will be, proposed for inclusion within an existing or proposed improvement zone/district, redevelopment area, assessment district, or community facilities district. f. If retail water service is to be provided through this change of organization, provide a description of the timely availability of water for projected needs within the area based upon the factors identified in Government Code Section 65352.5 (as required by Government Code Section 56668(k)).        Packet Page. 616 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 2 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 1-1 Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Regional Vicinity Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 1-1 Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Regional Vicinity Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.        Packet Page. 617 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 3 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis 1.2 Overview of the City of San Bernardino The City of San Bernardino is the county seat of San Bernardino County, occupying 62.5 square miles and is an anchor city for the Inland Empire. The 2023 city population is estimated at 223,230. Residents have access to more than 40 parks and fields, including premier athletic facilities, 7 community centers, a year-round aquatics center, a public library system, two higher education institutions, and 73 K-12 public schools. Major employers in the city include the County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino City Unified School District, California State University, the City of San Bernardino, Saint Bernardine Medical Center, the Community Hospital of San Bernardino, Caltrans, Stater Bros. Markets, Wells Fargo and Omnitrans. The city has been a major transit hub for over 100 years with the Interstate 10 and 215, the 210 and 259 Freeways, and the Metrolink commuter rail service. San Bernardino is a charter city, which means that the city has supreme authority over its municipal affairs, rather than being bound by the state’s general law if the City were a general law city. The City operates under a City Council-City Manager form of government. The Mayor and the seven-seat City Council are elected positions. Under the supervision of the City Council, the City Manager is the Chief Administrative Officer and directs most of the City Departments, other than the City Attorney and City Clerk, who report directly to the City Council, and the Municipal Water Department and the Library, which are governed by the Water Board and the Library Board of Trustees, respectively. 1.3 Organization of the Report Chapter 2 contains the description of the annexation area and existing development. The analysis of existing public service delivery in the annexation area and upon annexation into the City is presented in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 discusses the development impact fees and charges for infrastructure associated with the proposed annexation. The fiscal impact analysis of the annual operations and maintenance costs for the provision of services to the annexation area is provided in Chapter 5. Chapter 6 covers the revenue and cost assumptions used for the fiscal analysis. Appendix A includes a summary of the neighborhood infrastructure improvements associated with the Spring Trails Specific Plan. Supporting tables for the fiscal assumptions appear in Appendix B. Appendix C lists the project contacts and references used in the preparation of this study.        Packet Page. 618 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 4 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This chapter presents the land uses for the Meyers Road Island Area. Information includes housing units, population, assessed valuation and taxable sales. The total Meyers Road Island Area includes six parcels with four existing single-family units and two vacant parcels. As shown in Figure 2-1, the Island Area is fronted by Meyers Road between Wendy Ranch Road and Martin Ranch Road. This area is generally about one-third mile northwest of the intersection of Meyers Road and Little League Drive, with the latter connecting to the frontage road along I- 215. Freeway access is from the Palm Avenue interchange and the Glen Helen Parkway/Devore Road interchange. As shown in Figure 2-2, the Island Area includes six parcels zoned for single-family residential use for a total of 26.38 acres. Of these, four parcels include existing single-family residential units, and two parcels are currently vacant. The parcel APNs include 034811147, 034811148, 034811149, 034811150, 034811136, and 034811109. The annexation area is abutted by San Bernardino City to the south and west. To the north and east is the proposed Spring Trails Specific Plan, which was approved by San Bernardino LAFCO in October 2019 for annexation into the City pending certain conditions of approval. The Island Area, in the first place, was created due to the Spring Trails annexation, which LAFCO’s conditions of approval remedied by requiring the City to adopt a resolution for commitment to annex the Island Area at some point in the future. 2.1 Residential Development As shown in Panel A of Table 2-1, there are an estimated 4 single family residential units in the Island Area, while 2 parcels are vacant. No additional development is assumed in this area for the LAFCO required 5-year post-annexation period that is analyzed in this study. Based on the January 1, 2023, Citywide average estimate of 3.34 persons per unit from the Department of Finance, total population for the Annexation is projected at 13 persons over the 5-year period, as shown in Panel B of Table 2-1.        Packet Page. 619 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 5 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 2-1 Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Local Vicinity Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 2-1 Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Local Vicinity Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J.P. Weber Group, November 2016 Proposed Spring Trails Project Meyers Road Island Annexation Study Area        Packet Page. 620 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 6 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 2-2 Annexation Parcels Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 2-2 Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Parcels Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Joseph E. Bondiman & Associates, Inc.; J.P. Weber Group, 2024        Packet Page. 621 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 7 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 2-1 Residential Development Description Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 2-1 Residential Development Description 2.2 Assessed Valuation and Property Tax Assessed valuation for the total Meyers Road Island Area is estimated at $2.57 million at Year 5 after annexation, as shown in Panel B of Table 2-2. The current assessed valuation of about $2.57 million is estimated for Year 1, which remains unchanged as no new development is assumed over the 5-year study period. Existing assessed valuation is based on the County Assessor’s 2023 tax roll value (accessed in March 2024), as shown in Table 2-3. Projected Property Tax As shown in Panel C of Table 2-2, the City General Fund will not receive property tax for the assessed valuation of the annexation area. The San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) is now providing fire protection to the City. Based on the service agreement between the two jurisdictions, the property tax that would usually accrue to the City will remain with the SBCFPD and no property tax from other County funds and districts will be allocated to the City. Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Category 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Total A. Residential Units Existing Units 4 0 0 0 0 4 New Units 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Annual Units 4 0 0 0 0 4 Total Cumulative Units 4 4 4 4 4 New Annual Residential Square Feet 2 n/a 0 0 0 0 0 Total Cumulative New Square Feet n/a 0 0 0 0 B. Population 3 Total Annual Population 13 0 0 0 0 13 Total Cumulative Population 13 13 13 13 13 1. Population is projected at the Citywide average of 3.34 persons per unit for January 1, 2023. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.        Packet Page. 622 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 8 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 2-2 Assessed Valuation and Property Tax Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) 2-2 Assessed Valuation and Property Tax Existing New Growth New Growth New Growth New Growth Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Category 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Total A. Residential Units 1 Existing Units 4 4 New Units 0 0 0 0 0 Total Annual Units 4 0 0 0 0 4 Total Cumulative Units 4 4 4 4 4 B. Assessed Valuation Current Valuation 2 $2,565,029 New Valuation $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Annual Valuation $2,565,029 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,565,029 Total Cumulative Valuation $2,565,029 $2,565,029 $2,565,029 $2,565,029 $2,565,029 C. Projected Property Tax - Cumulative Annual 1 Percent Property Tax Levy $25,650 $25,650 $25,650 $25,650 $25,650 $128,251 (@ 1% of Valuation) Annual General Fund Property 3 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 (@ 0% of 1 Percent Levy) Total Cumulative Projected Property Tax $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D. Projected Property Tax In Lieu VLF Total Annual Valuation for Property Tax In Lieu VLF 4 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Cumulative Valuation for Property Tax In Lieu VLF $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Cumulative Projected Property Tax In Lieu VLF $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 (@ $1,270 per $1,000,000 Assessed Valuation) times Share Allocated to General Fund 5 73.5%73.5%73.5%73.5%73.5% equals General Fund Property In Lieu VLF $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1. Existing units obtained from the County Assessor data. No incremental growth is assumed over the 5-year period. 2. Current assessed valuation is based on the 2024 County Assessor tax roll values. 3. The San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) provides fire protection to the City. Based on an agreement between the City and the SBCFPD, the City will not receive any allocation of the basic one percent property tax levy upon annexation of the Spring Trails project. 4. Property tax in lieu of vehicle license fees (VLF) is projected based on the increase in assessed valuation in a jurisdiction. Per State law, when an annexation occurs the existing valuation in the annexing area cannot be used in adjusting the amount of assessed valuation in the annexing City. Therefore, the current valuation of $2,569,029 is not included in the projection of property tax in lieu of VLF. No PTVLF is projected because there is no new development assumed. 5. Based on the agreement between the SBCFPD and the City, the City will receive 73.5 percent of the projected property tax in lieu of VLF and the remaining 26.5 percent of the property tax in lieu of VLF will go to the SBCFPD. No PTVLF is projected because no new growth is assumed. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Finance Director        Packet Page. 623 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 9 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 2-3 Estimated Existing Assessed Valuation: 2023 Tax Roll Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 2-3 Estimated Existing Assessed Valuation Projected Property Tax in Lieu VLF The City General Fund will receive property tax in lieu of vehicle license fees (PTVLF) based on the increase in assessed valuation in the City. Per State law, when an annexation occurs the existing valuation in the area that is being annexed cannot be used in adjusting the base amount of assessed valuation in the annexing City. The City will receive property tax in-lieu of VLF based on the change in its gross assessed valuation of taxable property for new development in the annexed area. As shown in Appendix Table B-5, the property tax in lieu of VLF in the City is projected to increase at $1,270 per million dollars of new assessed valuation (AV). However, based on the service agreement between the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) and the City, the City will receive 73.5 percent of the projected property tax in lieu of VLF and the remaining 26.5 percent will go to the SBCFPD. As shown in Panel D of Table 2-2, no PTVLF is projected for the Island Area over the 5-year post- annexation study period, as no new development is assumed over this time frame. Over the long- term (beyond Year 5), it is possible that the study area parcels might redevelop, including new development on currently vacant parcels, which will then generate the PTVLF revenues as described above. 2.3 Sales and Use Tax Sales and use tax are shown for the retail taxable sales that can be attributed to the existing residents in the Island Area. Offsite retail sales and use tax is estimated based on the estimated Tax Rate APN Land Improvement Total Area 034811147 2.92 2,300 $234,812 $547,895 $782,707 107150 SFR 034811148 2.94 1,888 $170,000 $405,000 $575,000 107150 SFR 034811149 2.93 3,698 $96,584 $393,574 $490,158 107150 SFR 034811150 2.92 0 $208,080 $0 $208,080 107150 SFR - Vacant 034811136 10.37 2,447 $206,196 $293,388 $499,584 107150 SFR 034811109 4.30 0 $9,500 $0 $9,500 107150 SFR - Vacant 26.38 10,333 $925,172 $1,639,857 $2,565,029 Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. San Bernardino County Assessor, 2024 Valuation Land UseAcres Building Sq.Ft.        Packet Page. 624 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 10 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis household income and taxable retail purchases. Household income is estimated at 28 percent of average housing value based on a mortgage cost analysis by Stanley R. Hoffman Associates. Based on the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistic, Consumer Expenditure Survey, the fiscal analysis estimates the current residents generate total taxable retail purchases at about 33 percent of household income. As shown in Table 2-5, estimated annual offsite retail sales and use tax that can currently be attributed to the Island Area is estimated at $954 per annum, and stays at this level through Year 5. This is based on the estimated total annual household income for the Island Area, at about $718,000, 33 percent of which are spent on retail taxable purchases with a 35 percent capture within the City. A use tax factor of 14.9 percent is applied to the Bradley-Burns 1 percent point sales tax in the calculation. Table 2-4 Estimated Offsite Sales and Use Tax by Project Residents Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) 2-4 Estimated Offsite Sales and Use Tax by Project Residents Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Cumulative Category 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Total A. ANNUALIZED PROJECTIONS Annual New Residential Valuation $2,565,029 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,565,029 Annual Household Income (@ 28% of household valuation) 1 $718,208 $0 $0 $0 $0 $718,208 Annual Taxable Retail Spending (@ 33% of household income)$237,009 $0 $0 $0 $0 $237,009 Annual Projected Off-Site Retail Taxable Sales Captured in City $82,953 $0 $0 $0 $0 $82,953 (@ 35% capture) Annual Projected Sales and Use Tax to City Sales Tax (@ 1% of taxable sales)$830 $0 $0 $0 $0 $830 Use Tax (@ 14.9% of sales tax)124 0 0 0 0 124 Total Projected Sales and Use Tax $954 $0 $0 $0 $0 $954 B. CUMULATIVE PROJECTIONS Cumulative Sales and Use Tax $954 $954 $954 $954 $954 1. Based on current mortage-based estimates obtained from Zillow, and with housing expenditures at 30% of household income. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.        Packet Page. 625 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 11 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 3 PUBLIC FACILITIES BEFORE AND AFTER ANNEXATION This chapter describes the existing and anticipated future service providers for the proposed Meyers Road Island Area Annexation project area. The level and range of the services for the annexation area are described, if they are known. The following services are detailed in this chapter: • General Government • Fire and Paramedic • County Sheriff and Public Safety • Library • Parks and Recreation • Animal Control • Street Lighting • Landscape Maintenance • Water • Sewer • Transportation • Flood Control and Drainage • Utilities • Schools • Solid Waste Management • Health and Welfare On a general note, the Island Area will experience positive spillover neighborhood benefits from the many improvements required for the proposed Spring Trails Specific Plan annexation. This includes roadways, open space, parks and trails, landscaping, and water/sewer system infrastructure improvements. This will reduce the network costs for the City to service the overall area, including the Island Area. These details are not discussed in this report and can be found in the Plan for Services for the Spring Trails Specific Plan annexation. A summary table of these improvements is included in Appendix A-1. Table 3-1 presents current and anticipated service providers in the Meyers Road Island Area Annexation area. In many cases, such as general government, community development, economic development, and sheriff/police, among others, responsibilities shift from the County of San Bernardino to the City of San Bernardino. The City of San Bernardino has annexed into the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) and its Service Zone FP-5 for fire protection and emergency medical response services. Since the annexation area is already within SBCFPD and Service Zone FP-5, the SBCFPD will continue to be the service provider for fire protection and emergency medical services upon annexation.        Packet Page. 626 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 12 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 3-1 Current and Anticipated Service Providers in the Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 3-1 Current and Anticipated Service Providers in the Meyers Road Island Area Annexation 3.1 General Government Before Annexation The County of San Bernardino provides general government services, including: all Administrative services, Community Development services, and Economic Development services to the annexation area. After Annexation After the annexation, the City of San Bernardino will provide the general government services Service Type Current Service Provider Anticipated Service Provider General Government - Administrative Services: Finance Division County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Human Resources Division County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Business Registration County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Community Development: Planning County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Building & Safety County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Code Compliance County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Police Department Fire and Paramedic San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD), Service Zone FP-5 San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD), Service Zone FP-5 Sheriff/Police County of San Bernardino Sheriff's Department City of San Bernardino Police Department Library County of San Bernardino Library District City of San Bernardino Public Library Parks and Recreation: Local Facilities County of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Regional Facilities County of San Bernardino County of San Bernardino Animal Control Contract with City of San Bernardino Animal Services Department City of San Bernardino Animal Services Department Street Lighting City of San Bernardino City of San Bernardino Public Works Department Landscape Maintenance Forest/Natural City of San Bernardino Public Works Department Water: Domestic Water Private City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Dept. (SBMWD) Recycled Water Private City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Dept. (SBMWD) Water Quality Private City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Dept. (SBMWD) Sewer Private/Septic Systems City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Dept. (SBMWD) Transportation: Freeways and Interchanges Caltrans Caltrans Arterials and Collectors San Bernardino County - Public Works City of San Bernardino Public Works Department Local Roads San Bernardino County - Public Works City of San Bernardino Public Works Department Transit Omnitrans Omnitrans Flood Control and Drainage: Local Facilities San Bernardino County Flood Control District San Bernardino County Flood Control District Regional Facilities San Bernardino County Flood Control District San Bernardino County Flood Control District Utilities: Cable/Internet Provider/Phone Charter Communications Charter Communications Telephone Verizon Verizon Power Southern California Edison Southern California Edison Natural Gas Southern California Gas Company Southern California Gas Company Schools San Bernardino City Unified School District (SBCUSD)San Bernardino City Unified School District (SBCUSD) Solid Waste Management San Bernardino County Solid Waste Management Division contract with Burrtec City of San Bernardino contract with Burrtec Health and Welfare San Bernardino County Department of Public Health San Bernardino County Department of Public Health Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Website        Packet Page. 627 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 13 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis which include administrative services as well as General Governance, Community Development and Economic Development. 3.2 Fire and Paramedic Before Annexation Currently, the annexation area is in a State Responsibility Area (SRA), where CAL FIRE is responsible for fire and emergency response services. The area is also serviced by San Bernardino County Fire Station Number 2 (Devore Station). The proposed project is also located within the recently expanded boundary of the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD), Service Zone FP-5 which is a special tax zone for funding fire protection and EMS. The current annual special tax for property in Service Zone FP-5 is estimated at $157.26 per parcel. The tax includes an annual inflationary factor up to a maximum of 3 percent. No water facilities are available to serve fire protection in the project area. After Annexation The City of San Bernardino has annexed their fire protection services to the SBCFPD. Therefore, the SBCFPD, Service Zone FP-5 will be the service provider for fire prevention, fire protection and emergency medical services (EMS) after annexation. Most of the existing City fire stations and equipment are transferred to the SBCFPD; with existing Station 232 (City), located at 6065 Palm Avenue, being the closest (approximately 1 mile) to Island Area, as shown in Figure 3-1. Water facilities for fire protection will be owned and operated by the San Bernardino Municipal Water Department. All water facilities, hydrants, and water systems for fire protection in the area shall meet the water flow demands and be installed prior to development. All previous agreed upon egress for the project site that has been approved in the Environmental Impact Report shall be in place prior to construction. This includes the primary and secondary egress outlets.        Packet Page. 628 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 14 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 3-1 Fire Protection Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 3-1 Fire Protection Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Google Earth Pro        Packet Page. 629 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 15 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis 3.3 Sheriff/Police Before Annexation The San Bernardino County Sheriff-Coroner’s Department provides public safety services to the unincorporated areas. The County Sheriff operates from an office in the City of San Bernardino at 655 East Third Street. The Sheriff’s Department and the City Police Department provide mutual backup services upon request within both the City and unincorporated areas. The California Highway Patrol in San Bernardino provides traffic patrol on State Highways within the unincorporated areas of the County. The Highway Patrol can also provide emergency response backup to the City Police and the County Sheriff upon request. After Annexation After the annexation, the City of San Bernardino Police Department will be providing the public safety services for the Island Area and Spring Trails. The area is served by a main police station, located at 710 North D Street, and four designated geographical patrol districts (Northwest, Northeast, Southwest, and Southeast). The project site belongs to patrol beat B1 in the Northwest Patrol District, as shown in Figure 3-2. The San Bernardino Police Department maintains a ratio of approximately one sworn officer for every 1,000 residents. The City Police Department operates under a mutual aid agreement with police agencies in the surrounding cities that allows use of up to fifty percent of adjacent agency resources upon request and for automatic response within zones of mutual aid. The California Highway Patrol in San Bernardino will continue to provide traffic patrol on State Highways within the unincorporated areas. 3.4 Library Before Annexation Currently, the existing households within the annexation area is served by the San Bernardino County Library system. However, the nearest County library, the Carter Branch Library is located at 2630 North Linden Drive in Rialto and is a driving distance of about 12.2 miles away from the annexation area. After Annexation The Howard M. Rowe Branch Library facility is a branch of the San Bernardino City Library system. Located at 108 East Marshall Boulevard in the City of San Bernardino, this branch is closest to the Island Area, with a driving distance of about 9.6 miles. The annexation area would continue to receive library services from the City of San Bernardino Branch library upon annexation.        Packet Page. 630 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 16 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Figure 3-2 City of San Bernardino Police Department: Northwest District Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 3-2 City of San Bernardino Police Department: Northwest District Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Police Department 3.5 Parks and Recreation Before Annexation The County Regional Parks Department provides regional park services to all residents within the County, including unincorporated areas. The County Regional Parks system includes the following parks: Glen Helen, Yucaipa, Lake Gregory, Cucamonga, Guasti, and Prado. The closest regional park is Glen Helen Regional Park which has various recreation areas with amenities for fishing, boating, and picnicking. However, the County does not provide local park services, and, currently, there are no local parks within the annexation area. ISLAND AREA        Packet Page. 631 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 17 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis After Annexation The City of San Bernardino General Plan indicates that there are a total of 52 developed parks and recreational facilities in the City. There are a variety of different types of parks, including: 19 neighborhood, 10 community, 17 mini-parks, 3 regional parks, and 3 special facilities. The parks contain a broad range of facilities; including children’s play equipment, tennis and volleyball courts, and athletic fields. The special facilities include community buildings and senior centers. Al Guhin Park, located at 3650 Little League Drive, is the closest City park to the annexation area (approximately 1.3 miles). The proposed Spring Trails Specific Plan to the north of the Island Area will add additional open spaces that are meant to function as recreational opportunities, buffers, visual landmarks, and interconnecting trails. The facilities will consist of community trails, equestrian/pedestrian trails and hiking trails. 3.6 Animal Control Before Annexation Currently, the annexation area is serviced by the City of San Bernardino’s Animal Control on a contract basis. Animal Control is a field service provided by the City of San Bernardino Animal Services Department and is responsible for animal licensing, dead animal pickup, loose animal investigations, animal shelter management, and other services. After Annexation The Animal Control field service of the City of San Bernardino Animal Services Department will continue to provide services to the area after annexation. 3.7 Street Lighting Before Annexation Street lighting is a service provided to the area by Southern California Edison. However, the street lighting only extends to the southern border at Meyers Road, and no street lighting exists within the Island Area along Wendy Ranch Road. After Annexation Upon annexation, the City of San Bernardino Public Works Department is responsible for the maintenance of lighting in the public right of ways.        Packet Page. 632 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 18 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis 3.8 Landscape Maintenance Before Annexation San Bernardino County provides road pavement and minimal landscaping maintenance. After Annexation Upon annexation and development, the responsibility will fall upon the City of San Bernardino Public Works Department. 3.9 Water Before Annexation Currently, public water facilities do not serve the parcels in the Island Area. After Annexation Upon annexation, the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department (SBMWD) would provide water services to the Island Area. The area lies between the 2,300 to 3,000-foot pressure zones. The nearest existing reservoir is the Meyers Canyon Reservoir, which is within the 2,100- foot pressure zone, but is not adequate for Verdemont Heights. Therefore, including the demand from the proposed Spring Trails project, water will be supplied from lower elevations by a combination of expanding and improving the offsite water system and the provision of onsite reservoirs and transmission lines. 3.10 Wastewater Collection Before Annexation Sewer service to the project site is currently via septic tanks. After Annexation The Island Area is within the City’s Public Works Department’s sanitary sewer service area. The City’s engineering sewer capacity study concluded that the existing sewer system has the capacity to accommodate the Island Area and the proposed Spring Trails project. Beginning May 2017, operation and maintenance of the City’s wastewater collection system was transferred to the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department (SBMWD). Under proposed improvements for Spring Trails, the project would connect to the existing 10- inch sewer line located on Little League Drive, which connects to a major interceptor system to the south and is eventually treated in the San Bernardino Water Reclamation Plant operated by        Packet Page. 633 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 19 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis SBMWD. The only offsite improvement that may be required is North Little League Drive, which may be upgraded from an 8” to a 10” line depending upon the ultimate slope as determined in final engineering.1 3.11 Transportation Before Annexation Current transportation services for the annexation area include freeways and interchanges serviced by Caltrans; arterials and collectors serviced by the County Public Works Department; local roads also serviced by the Public Works Department of San Bernardino County; and public transit serviced by Omnitrans. The closest Omnitrans bus stop to the annexation area is at Kendall Drive and Palm Avenue with a driving distance of about 2.2 miles. After Annexation Caltrans and Omnitrans will continue to provide their services post annexation for arterials, collectors and public transit. Upon annexation, the City becomes responsible for the regional transportation fee associated with the proposed project, which is included in the review of City fees for new development in Chapter 4, Table 4-2. 3.12 Flood Control and Drainage Before Annexation The drainage area to which the Island Area belongs flows into Cable Canyon, then into Cable Creek, then into Devil Creek Diversion Channel, then into Lytle Creek Wash and eventually into the Santa Ana River. Currently, there are no local flood control or drainage facilities in the annexation area. On a regional level, the San Bernardino County Flood Control District intercepts and manages flood flows through and away from developed areas throughout the County. The District is also responsible for water conservation and storm drain construction. After Annexation Upon annexation, flood control and drainage systems remain under the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. The existing Cable Canyon and Meyers Canyon drainage ways would remain relatively unchanged, except for necessary roadway and infrastructure improvements. 1 Montecito Equities, Spring Trails Specific Plan, October 2012, p. 3-112        Packet Page. 634 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 20 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis 3.13 Utilities Before and After Annexation Utilities include cable television, internet, telephone, electric power, and natural gas. Currently, Charter Communications is the cable television and internet service provider. Verizon maintains telephone service to the annexation area. Electricity is provided by Southern California Edison, while natural gas is supplied by the Southern California Gas Company. These service providers are not anticipated to change upon annexation. 3.14 Schools Before and After Annexation Public education in the City of San Bernardino is provided by San Bernardino City Unified School District (SBCUSD). SBCUSD is the eighth-largest public school district in California with over 54,379 students enrolled at 44 elementary schools, 10 middle schools, 8 high schools and 3 special education schools. Before the annexation, the SBCUSD served the unincorporated area. SBCUSD will continue to serve the existing development as well as any future development in the annexation with North Verdemont Elementary School (3555 West Meyers Road), Chavez Middle School (6650 North Magnolia Avenue), and Cajon High School (1200 Hill Drive), as shown in Figure 3-9. Palm Avenue Elementary School is also located near the annexation area at 6565 Palm Avenue. Figure 3-3 Local Elementary, Middle and High Schools San Bernardino City Unified School District City of San Bernardino 3-3 Local Elementary, Middle and High Schools Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.        Packet Page. 635 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 21 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis 3.15 Solid Waste Management Before Annexation The current service provider of solid waste management for the annexation area is the San Bernardino County Department of Public Works’ Solid Waste Management Division, under the contract with Burrtec. The division oversees the operation and management of the County’s solid waste disposal system, which includes five regional landfills and nine transfer stations. After Annexation Solid waste collection within the City of San Bernardino and a portion of the unincorporated planning area is provided by Burrtec on a contract basis with the City. 3.16 Public Health and Welfare Before and After Annexation The San Bernardino County Department of Public Health currently serves the City for the general public’s health and welfare services. The department provides a variety of programs and services that informs and educates the public about health issues. The County Department of Public Health additionally provides public assistance welfare and healthcare needs for all residents within San Bernardino County. There are no anticipated changes in service levels or costs after the annexation of the proposed project.        Packet Page. 636 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 22 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 4 PAYING FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE 4.1 Overview of Development Impact Fees Any new development in the Island Area will pay one-time development impact fees (DIF) to offset the additional public capital costs required of new development. If the developer constructs any facilities covered by DIFs, the developer will receive credit toward construction costs for an equivalent amount of DIF fees. At this time, no new development is assumed for the period of 5 years post-annexation being analyzed in this study. Therefore, no development impact fees are projected for this period for the Island Area Annexation. For information purposes, one-time development impact fees that could be collected by the City and the Municipal Water Department upon annexation are shown in Table 4-1. City fees include Community Development, Public Safety and Engineering fees. 4.2 Schools There is a one-time School Impact Fee of $4.31 per square foot for new, single-family residential development in the City of San Bernardino. 4.3 Utilities Cable television, internet, power, and gas utilities are enterprise services, where fees are determined by each company’s rate structure. 4.4 Roads and Drainage The local circulation systems fee is $233 per unit, while the regional circulation systems fee is $2,435 per unit, as shown in Table 4-1. 4.5 Water and Sewer The San Bernardino Municipal Water Department (SBMWD) charges a Sewer Capacity Fee of $3,500 per unit and a Water Connection Fee of $7,110 per unit, as shown in Table 4-1.        Packet Page. 637 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 23 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 4-1 Summary of City Development Impact Fees Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) 4-1 Summary of City Development Impact Fees Estimated Development Fees Development Impact Fee Category 1 Amount Impact Fees New Residential Units 0 Fee per Unit City Fees 2 Community Development Fees Aquatic Facilities $326 $0 Cultural Development $3,000 $0 Library Facilities $638 $0 Public Meeting Facilities $1,090 $0 Parkland and Open Space $9,518 $0 Subtotal $14,571 $0 Public Safety Fees Law Enforcement $639 $0 Subtotal $639 $0 Engineering Fees Local Circulation Systems $233 $0 Regional Circulation Systems $2,435 $0 Storm Drain $3,926 $0 Verdemont (Chestnut Drainage Fee -- $0.289/ sq. ft.)$957 $0 Verdemont (Palm Box Culvert/ Signal -- $0.022/ sq. ft.)$74 $0 Subtotal $7,624 $0 Total City Fees $22,835 $0 Water & Sewer - City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department (SBMWD) 4 Sewer Capacity $3,500 $0 Water Connection (3/4" x 3/4")$7,110 $0 Total SBMWD Fees $10,610 $0 TOTAL FEES $33,445 $0 1. Note that the analysis does not include engineering processing fees, applicable fee credits, potential CFD/AD proceeds or potential impact of a Development Agreement, Mitigation Agreement, SB 50 Agreement, or similar agreement. 2. Represents the applicable fees per the City of San Bernardino fee schedule cited below. Actual fee amounts may differ at the time of application for building permits or connection to services. 3. Upon annexation, payment of the regional circulation system fee which was the requirement of the County prior to annexation will transfer to the City. 4. Represents the applicable water fees per the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Land Development Division Impact Fees, Effective February 15, 2022 (Accessed 8/2023)        Packet Page. 638 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 24 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 5 FISCAL IMPACTS This chapter describes the fiscal analysis of the Meyers Road Island Area annexation. Fiscal impacts are first presented to the City of San Bernardino General Fund followed by the projected recurring revenues to the City’s Gas Tax Fund, and the City’s Measure I Fund. Fiscal impacts are shown in constant 2024 dollars with no adjustment for possible future inflation. As required by LAFCO, this study analyzes and presents the fiscal impacts of the Island Area on the City General Fund and other funds for the first five years upon annexation. First year post- annexation is assumed to be 2026. 5.1 City General Fund A small deficit of $2,474 is projected to the City General Fund for the Meyers Road Island Area Annexation at Year 5 upon annexation, as shown in Table 5-1. The projected deficit is based on recurring revenues of about $5,738 and recurring costs of about $8,212. This projection includes assumed revenues from the recently adopted CFD 2018-1 tax for safety services. The revenue- to-cost ratio is estimated at about 0.70 at Year 5 upon annexation. Projected deficit to the General Fund declines slightly from $2,756 in Year 1 upon annexation through $2,474 in Year 5. The calculation assumes revenues from the recently adopted CFD 2018-1 tax for safety services family unit, which increases over time. Table 5-1 Summary of Projected General Fund Recurring Fiscal Impacts Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) 5-1 Summary of Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 General Fund 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Estimated Annual Recurring Revenues $5,456 $5,522 $5,591 $5,664 $5,738 Estimated Annual Recurring Costs $8,212 $8,211 $8,212 $8,212 $8,212 Estimated Annual Recurring Surplus ($2,756)($2,689)($2,620)($2,548)($2,474) Estimated Annual Revenue/Cost Ratio 0.66 0.67 0.68 0.69 0.70 Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.        Packet Page. 639 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 25 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis General Fund Projected Recurring Revenues The CFD 2018-1 (safety services) taxes, Utility User tax, and off-site and Measure-S sales taxes account for about 82 percent of the total projected General Fund revenues at Year 5, as shown in the detailed projected fiscal impacts in Table 5-2. General Fund Projected Recurring Costs As also shown in Table 5-2, police protection and general government account for about 76 percent of total projected recurring General Fund costs for the project after buildout. Table 5-2 Detailed General Fund Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) 5-2 Detailed General Fund Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Percent General Fund 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 of Buildout Estimated Recurring Revenues Property tax 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Property tax in lieu of VLF 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% Off-site retail sales and use tax 954 954 954 954 954 16.6% Measure S - sales tax 852 852 852 852 852 14.8% Franchise tax 548 548 548 548 548 9.5% CFD 2018-1 (safety services) 2 1,666 1,732 1,802 1,874 1,949 34.0% Charges for current services 143 143 143 143 143 2.5% Fines and forfeitures 58 58 58 58 58 1.0% Intergovernmental revenues 78 78 78 78 78 1.4% Miscellaneous revenues 56 56 56 56 56 1.0% Tow franchise revenues 28 28 28 28 28 0.5% Property transfer tax-turnover 3 0 0 0 0 0 0.0% Sales tax - public safety 76 76 76 76 76 1.3% Utility user tax 997 997 997 997 997 17.4% Total Projected Revenues $5,456 $5,522 $5,591 $5,664 $5,738 100.0% Estimated Recurring Costs Economic and housing development $68 $68 $68 $68 $68 0.8% Police protection 4,949 4,949 4,949 4,949 4,949 60.3% Parks, recreation and community services 268 268 268 268 268 3.3% Public works' services 1,236 1,236 1,236 1,236 1,236 15.1% Transfer to Animal Control Fund 197 197 197 197 197 2.4% Library 153 153 153 153 153 1.9% General government - O&M/contracts 458 458 458 458 458 5.6% General government - overhead 883 883 883 883 883 10.8% Total Recurring Costs $8,212 $8,211 $8,212 $8,212 $8,212 100.0% Estimated Net Recurring Surplus -$2,756 -$2,689 -$2,620 -$2,548 -$2,474 Estimated Revenue/Cost Ratio 0.66 0.67 0.68 0.69 0.70 1. Based on information from the City Finance Director, per the agreement between the City and the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) the City will not receive any of the basic one percent property tax upon annexation of the Spring Trails project. 2. The City formed CFD 2018-1 in October 2018 which levies a special tax to provide finances for a portion of ongoing citywide public safety services. The special tax is $385 per single family unit and $358 per multi-family unit effective July 1, 2019 through June 2024. Beginning July 1, 2024, these rates will increase by four percent each following July 1. 3. Residential turnover is not anticipated within first 5 years of annexation. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Finance Director        Packet Page. 640 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 26 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis 5.2 Other Funds Fund 126 – Gas Tax As shown in Panel A of Table 5-3, recurring Gas Tax Fund revenues to the City are projected at $292 per year for the Island Area annexation over the 5-year period. These revenues are earmarked for transportation related expenditures. Fund 129 – Measure I Measure I includes a ½ cent sales tax for transportation expenditures. Recurring Measure I revenues are projected at $89 per year over the 5-year period, as shown in Panel B of Table 5-3. Table 5-3 Summary of Projected Other Funds Recurring Revenues Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) 5-3 Summary of Projected Other Funds Recurring Revenues Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Other Funds 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 A. Fund 126 - Gas Tax 1 Annual Recurring Gasoline Tax $292 $292 $292 $292 $292 B. Fund 129 - Measure I 1 1/2 cent sales and road tax $89 $89 $89 $89 $89 1. Annual recurring gasoline tax and Measure I revenues are restricted to street related expenditures. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc.        Packet Page. 641 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 27 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis CHAPTER 6 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO FISCAL ASSUMPTIONS This chapter presents the revenue and cost assumptions for projecting the ongoing operations and maintenance costs to the City General Fund and related City Funds for the Meyers Road Island Area annexation into the City of San Bernardino. As discussed earlier, the annexation area is currently located in the unincorporated area of San Bernardino County, within the existing sphere of influence of the City of San Bernardino. The general City demographic and economic assumptions used for calculating fiscal factors are first presented. The assumptions for projecting recurring revenues are then presented followed by the assumptions for projecting recurring costs. The fiscal factors are based on discussion with City finance staff and the City’s Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget. 6.1 City General Assumptions Fiscal impacts that are not based on valuation and taxable sales are generally projected based on a per capita, per employee, or per service population basis. Some fiscal impacts are projected based on other factors, such as per unit or per acre, based on the available data. General fund revenue and cost factors are estimated by dividing the FY 2023-24 budget categories by the City’s resident population, employment, total service population, or developed acres where appropriate. Table 6-1 provides the City’s general assumptions for this fiscal analysis. Population As shown in Table 6-1, the State Department of Finance (DOF) estimates the City of San Bernardino’s January 1, 2023, total population at 223,230. The City population estimate is used for projecting certain revenues and costs on a per capita basis, such as State subvened gas taxes. Housing Units DOF estimates 67,593 total housing units for the City of San Bernardino for January 1, 2023. DOF estimates that 64,905 units are occupied. Persons per Household The 2023 average persons per household for the City is estimated at 3.34 persons based on dividing the household population estimate of 216,854 by the 64,905 estimated occupied units.        Packet Page. 642 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 28 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 6-1 City Population, Housing and Employment Assumptions Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino 6-1 City Population, Housing and Employment Assumptions Employment For fiscal factors that are impacted by only employment, such as business license taxes, the City’s total employment is used as the basis for calculating the factor. The total City employment of 112,478 for the year 2023 represents an interpolation of the years 2019 and 2035 from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2024 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), Preliminary Data. Assumption Description Population and Housing 1 216,854 Total Household Population 6,376 Group Quarters Population 223,230 Total Resident Population 43,315 Single Family Units 24,278 Multi-Family Units 67,593 Total Housing Units 64,905 Occupied Housing Units 3.34 Citywide Average Household Size Employment 112,478 Total City Employment 2 Service Population 3 223,230 Total Resident Population 56,239 Employment Weighted at 50% 279,469 Total Service Population Note: 1. Population and housing estimates are January 1, 2023 estimates provided by the California Department of Finance (DOF). 2. The total employment estimate for 2023 based on an interpolation of the 2019 and 2035 estimates from the Southern California Association of Governments, (SCAG) 2024 RTP preliminary estimates. 3. This analysis has weighted the employment at 50% to account for the estimated less frequent use of City services by employment versus population. Service population equals the total resident population plus the weighted employment. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. State of California, Department of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State - January 1, 2021-2023, Sacramento, May 2023 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), P reliiminary RTP 2024 Projecions Data        Packet Page. 643 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 29 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Service Population Fiscal factors that are impacted by both population and employment growth are estimated by allocating total budgeted revenues or costs to the estimated service population. Service population includes the City’s resident population plus 50 percent of the total estimated City employment. Employment is weighted at 50 percent to account for the estimated less frequent use of City services by employment versus population. As shown in Table 6-1, The City’s service population is estimated at 279,469 and represents the City’s estimated resident population of 223,230 plus 50 percent of the City’s estimated total employment, or 56,239 (50 percent of the total employment of 112,478). 6.2 City Revenue Assumptions The General Fund and Gas Tax Fund revenue factors that are used in preparing the fiscal analysis for the Island Area are presented in Table 6-2. These factors are based on the City’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-24 Adopted revenues for the General Fund and Other Funds shown in Appendix Table B-1 and Table B-2 and the City’s population, employment and service population estimates that are presented in Table 6-1. General Fund Property Taxes - General Fund. The San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) is now providing fire protection to the City. Based on the agreement between the City and the SBCFPD, the City will not receive a share of the 1.0 percent basic levy. The SBCFPD will receive the entire allocations that would have previously been allocated to the City. Property Tax In Lieu of Vehicle License Fees. Cities and counties began receiving additional property tax revenue to replace vehicle license fee (VLF) revenue that was lowered in 2004 when the state reduced the vehicle license tax. This property tax in lieu of VLF is projected to grow with the change in the citywide gross assessed valuation (AV) of taxable property from the prior year. As shown in Appendix Table B-3, the property tax in lieu of VLF in the City is projected to increase at an average of $1,270 per million dollars of new assessed valuation (AV). This factor is based on the change in AV and the change in property tax in lieu of VLF in the City over the last 10 years.        Packet Page. 644 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 30 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 6-2 General Fund and Other Funds Recurring Revenue Factors Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) 6-2 General Fund and Other Funds Recurring Revenue Factors FY 2023-24 Adopted Revenue Source Budget Projection Basis 1 GENERAL FUND Property Taxes 2 n/a Case Study: Project Valuation 0.00%City general share of 1% levy Property Tax In Lieu VLF (PTVLF) 3 $23,000,000 Case Study $1,270 per $1,000,000 assessed valuation 73.5%of PTVLF allocated to General Fund Sales and Use Tax $51,500,000 Taxable Sales 100% of 1% of projected sales and use tax Use Tax Factor Use Tax as Percent of Sales Tax 14.9%of sales tax Measure S - Sales Tax 4 $46,000,000 Case Study $893.00 per $1,000 of sales and use tax Franchise Taxes $11,781,000 Service Population = 279,469 $42.15 per service population CFD 2018-1 (Safety Services) 5 n/a Residential Units $400 per single family unit $372 per multi-family unit Charges for Current Services $2,450,750 Population = 223,230 $10.98 per capita Fines and Forfeitures $1,255,500 Service Population = 279,469 $4.49 per service population Intergovernmental Revenues $1,335,000 Population = 223,230 $5.98 per capita Business Registration $8,000,000 Employment =112,478 $71.13 per employee Miscellaneous Revenues $1,209,056 Service Population = 279,469 $4.33 per service population Tow Franchise $606,000 Service Population = 279,469 $2.17 per service population Property Transfer Tax $1,100,000 Property turnover 5.0%Residential turnover rate and valuation assumptions $0.55 per $1,000 assessed valuation Sales Tax - Public Safety $1,300,000 Population = 223,230 $5.82 per capita Utility User Tax $21,430,500 Service Population = 279,469 $76.68 per service population GAS TAX FUND 126 State gasoline tax $5,008,561 Population = 223,230 $22.44 per capita MEASURE I FUND 129 1/2% sales tax $4,808,000 City Sales and Use Tax =$51,500,000 $93.36 per $1,000 City sales and use tax 1. For fiscal factors that are based on population and employment, an estimated service population factor is applied, which represents the total population plus 50% of the total employment estimate. 2. Based on information from the City Finance Director, at this time the City General Fund will not receive any of the one percent basic property tax levy on the property's assessed valuation because of the property tax exchange agreement between the City and the County Fire Protection District. The County Fire Protection District now provides fire protection to the City. 3. The State has lowered the VLF rate, which reduces the amount of VLF received by cities and counties. However, the State is providing property taxes to offset the VLF reduction. VLF is estimated to change according to the City's increased in assessed valuation, as shown in Appendix Table B-3. Based on the property tax agreement between the City and the County Fire Protection District, the City will receive 73.5 percent of the projected property tax in lieu of VLF from the project. 4. The City enacted Measure S in 2006 which is a 0.25 percent sales tax and increased to 1 percent in 2020 by voters. 5. The City formed Community Facilities District (CFD) 2018-1 in October 2018 which levies a special tax to provide finances for a portion of ongoing citywide public safety services. The special tax is $385 per single family unit and $358 per multi-family unit effective July 1, 2019 through June 2024. Beginning July 1, 2024, these rates will increase by four percent each following July 1. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget City of San Bernardino, Finance Director State of California, Department of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State - January 1, 2021-2023, Sacramento, May 2023 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), Preliiminary RTP 2024 Projecions Data Projection Factor        Packet Page. 645 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 31 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis The City receives property tax in-lieu of VLF based on the change in its gross assessed valuation of taxable property for new development in the annexed area. Per State law, the existing valuation in an annexing area cannot be used in adjusting the base amount of assessed valuation in the annexing City. However, based on the agreement between the City and the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District the City will receive only 73.5 percent of the projected property tax in lieu of VLF. Sales and Use Tax. Sales tax revenues to the local jurisdiction are projected at one percent of taxable sales. The City receives one percent of the taxable sales of most goods occurring within City limits. In addition to sales tax revenue, the City receives revenues from use tax, which is levied on shipments into the state and on construction materials for new development not allocated to a situs location. Use tax is allocated by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) based on each jurisdiction's proportion of countywide and statewide direct taxable sales. Use tax revenues to the City of San Bernardino are estimated at an additional 14.9 percent of point-of-sale sales tax, as shown in Appendix Table B-4. Half-year 2022 sales tax data provided obtained from CDTFA estimates that $3,549,772 of total sales and use tax were made from levies designated as use tax and the remaining $23,826,715 of the sales and use tax was point-of-sale sales tax. Therefore, use tax revenues to the City of San Bernardino are estimated at an additional 14.9 percent of point-of-sale sales tax. Measure S – Sales Tax. As shown in Table 6-2, Measure Z sales tax is projected at $893 per $1,000 of City sales and use tax. This tax is an additional component of sales and use tax that established an additional 0.25 percent sales tax that took effect in 2007. Measure S was increased to 1 percent sales tax by voters in 2020. Based on discussion with the City’s finance director, this revenue is assumed for the fiscal analysis. Franchise Taxes. Franchise taxes are projected at $42.15 per service population based on FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget revenues of $11,781,000 and the service population estimate of 279,469. City franchise taxes are collected for providers of cable, electric, gas, and telephone. Community Facilities District (CFD) 2018-1 (Safety Services). The City formed CFD 2018-1 In October 2018 which levies a special tax to provide financing for a portion of ongoing public safety services. The special tax was $385 per single family unit and $358 per multi-family unit.        Packet Page. 646 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 32 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Collection of the fee began July 1, 2019, and will remain at the current rate for five years. Beginning July 1, 2024, these rates will increase by four percent each following July 1. Charges for Current Services. Based on estimated FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget recurring revenues of $2,450,750 and the City’s population estimate, charges for current services are projected at $10.98 per capita. These revenues do not include one-time fees and charges, as shown in Appendix Table B-1. Fines and Forfeitures. These revenues include vehicle code fines, parking citations and other fines and penalties, and are projected at $4.49 per service population based on estimated FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget revenues of $1,255,500 and the City’s service population of 279,469. Intergovernmental Revenues. As shown in Table 6-2, these revenues are projected at $5.98 per capita based on estimated FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget revenues of $1,335,000 and the City’s population estimate of 223,230. Business Registration. These revenues are not projected for the Island Area because there is no employment projected for the project. Miscellaneous Revenue. These revenues are projected at $4.28 per service population based on estimated FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget recurring revenues of $1,209,056 and the City’s service population estimate of 279,469. Water Fund contributions for administrative services are included in this category. Revenues that are generated on a one-time basis and revenues that are not directly generated by the project are not included in this category. Tow Franchise. Tow franchise revenues are projected at $2.17 per service population based on FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget revenues of $606,000 and the service population of 279,469. Property Transfer Tax. Sales of real property are taxed by San Bernardino County at a rate of $1.10 per $1,000 of property value. For property located in the City, property transfer tax is divided equally between the City and the County, with the City receiving $0.55 per $1,000 of transferred property value. Based on the U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey for the period from 2015 to 2021, residential development in the City of San Bernardino is estimated to change ownership at an average rate of about 5.0 percent per year (Appendix Table B-5).        Packet Page. 647 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 33 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Sales Tax – Public Safety. These revenues are projected at $5.82 per capita based on the City FY 2023-24 Adopted revenue amount of $1,300,000 and the population estimate of 223,230. Utility User Tax. The City of San Bernardino levies a utility user tax on the users of cable, natural gas, electricity and telephone services within the City. Based on the City FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget revenue amount of $21,430,500 and the City’s estimated service population of 279,469, utility user taxes are projected at $76.68 per service population. Gas Tax Fund 126 As shown in Table 6-2, total State gasoline tax revenues to the City are projected at $22.44 per capita based on estimated FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget revenues of $5,008,561 and the City’s total population estimate of 223,230. These revenues include appropriations the shown in Appendix Table B-2. These revenues are earmarked for road related expenditures. Measure I Fund 129 Measure I includes is a ½ cent sales tax. As shown in Table 6-2, total Measure I sales tax revenues to the City are projected at $93.36 per $1,000 of total sales and use tax. This factor is based on estimated FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget revenues of $4,808,000 for Measure I sales tax and the City’s total sales and use tax of $51,500,000. These revenues are earmarked for transportation related expenditures. 6.3 City Cost Assumptions The General Fund cost factors that are used in preparing the fiscal analysis for the Meyers Road Island Area Annexation are presented in Table 6-3. These factors are based on the City’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-24 Adopted Budget net expenditures shown in Table 6-3 and the City’s population and service population estimates that are presented in Table 6-1. City General Fund expenditures are projected for general government, or overhead functions; community development; police; parks, recreation and community services; public works; and transfers from the General Fund to the Animal Control Fund and to Library services. Water and sewer operations are assumed to not impact the General Fund because they are enterprise functions and maintenance costs are assumed to be covered through the payment of user fees and charges. Fire protection to the City is provided by the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District, and these costs are not included in this analysis.        Packet Page. 648 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 34 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 6-3 General Fund Recurring Cost Factors Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) 6-3 General Fund Recurring Cost Factors General Government General government costs include administration and support of the departmental functions. General government costs for City of San Bernardino include Mayor, City Council, City Clerk, City Attorney, City Manager, Human Resources, Finance, Benefits, Dues and Subscriptions and Debt Service. These are generalized citywide services and can’t be directly linked to a specific department or project. As shown in Table 6-4, Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget general government costs are estimated at $19,914,991 and direct departmental costs (or non-general government) are estimated at $165,342,925. Average general government costs are projected at about 12.0 percent of direct non-general government costs. FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget Cost Category Total Net Projection Basis 1 Cost Factor 1 General Government - Overhead $19,914,991 $19,914,991 Share of Line Costs 12.0%of direct department costs General Government - Operations and Maintenance (O&M)/Contracts $9,846,601 $9,846,601 Service Population = 279,469 $35.23 per service population Community and Economic Devevelopment 2 $11,923,799 $1,452,799 Service Population = 279,469 $5.20 per service population Police Protection $106,395,588 $106,395,588 Service Population = 279,469 $380.71 per service population Parks, Recreation and Community Services $4,596,710 $4,596,710 Population = 223,230 $20.59 per capita Public Works Services $26,567,943 $26,567,943 Service Population = 279,469 $95.07 per service population Transfer to Animal Control Fund $3,378,783 $3,378,783 Population = 223,230 $15.14 per capita Library $2,633,501 $2,633,501 Population = 223,230 $11.80 per capita 1. For fiscal factors that are based on population and employment, an estimated service population factor is applied, which represents the total population plus 50% of the total employment estimate. 2. Net community and economic development services costs are calculated from budgeted costs minus projected one-time charges for services revenues, license revenues and permit revenues that offset the budgeted costs, as shown in Table B-6. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget City of San Bernardino, Finance Director State of California, Department of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State - January 1, 2021-2023, Sacramento, California, May 2023 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), 2024 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), Preliminary Data.        Packet Page. 649 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 35 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table 6-4 Calculation of City General Government Overhead Rate Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis (In Constant 2024 Dollars) 6-4 Calculation of City General Government Overhead Rate General Government – Operations and Maintenance (O&M)/Contracts About $9,846,601 of General Fund expenditures are for operations and maintenance contracts. Based on this amount and the City’s estimated service population of 279,469, these costs are projected at $35.23 per service population, as shown in Table 6-3. FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget General Fund Expenditures Total General Government Non-General Government General Government Mayor $317,840 $317,840 City Council 959,087 959,087 City Clerk 1,586,893 1,586,893 City Attorney 3,310,443 3,310,443 City Manager 2,401,885 2,401,885 Human Resources 2,587,614 2,587,614 Finance 6,218,078 6,218,078 General Government: Transfer to Animal Control 3,378,783 3,378,783 Net Personnel 45,090 45,090 Dues and Subscriptions 122,953 122,953 Maintenance and Operations/Contractual 9,846,601 9,846,601 Debt Service 2,365,108 2,365,108 General Government Subtotal 15,758,535 Non-General Government Community & Economic Development $11,923,799 $11,923,799 Police 106,395,588 106,395,588 Parks, Recreation and Community Services 4,596,710 4,596,710 Public Works 26,567,943 26,567,943 Library 2,633,501 2,633,501 GRAND TOTAL GENERAL FUND $185,257,916 $19,914,991 $165,342,925 Current General Government Overhead Rate General Government Expenditures $19,914,991 divided by Direct General Fund Expenditures $165,342,925 equals Current General Government Overhead Rate 12.0% Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget City of San Bernardino, Finance Director        Packet Page. 650 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 36 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Community and Economic Development As also shown in Table 6-3, Community and Economic Development costs are projected on net cost basis. Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget Community and Economic Development costs of $11,923,799 are offset by one-time development related permit and fee revenues, as shown in Appendix Table B-6, to result in net costs of $1,452,799. This divided by the service population of 279,469 results in $5.20 per service population. Police Department Based on expenditures of $106,395,588 in the FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget budget, and the City’s service population estimate of 279,469, police costs are projected at $380.71 per service population. As discussed in Chapter 3, the San Bernardino Police Department maintains a ratio of approximately one sworn officer for every 1,000 residents. The annexation area will be served by a main police station, located at 710 North D Street. The project site belongs to patrol beat B1 in the Northwest Patrol District. Parks, Recreation and Community Services Citywide average annual costs for parks, recreation and community services are projected at $20.59 per capita based on the City’s FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget recurring costs for these services of $4,569,710 and the City’s population estimate of 223,230. Onsite parks, trails and open space will be maintained through a homeowners association. Public Works Services The Public Works Department maintains streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters; street signs, street trees, traffic signals, streetlights, storm drains and sewer main lines. The Department also works with the Police Department for the prevention and removal of graffiti and provides collection services for refuse, recyclables and green waste. Based on FY 2023-24 expenditures of $26,567,943 and the City’s service population estimate of 279,469, average costs for all General Fund Public Works services are projected at $95.07 per service population. All project onsite streets, drains and streetlights will be maintained through a homeowners association and a lighting/ landscaping maintenance district.        Packet Page. 651 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 37 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Transfer to Animal Control Fund Animal Control services are financed through a separate Animal Control Fund. Based on the City’s FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget General Fund transfers of $3,378,783 to the Animal Control Fund and the City’s population estimate of 223,230, these costs are projected at $15.14 per capita, as shown in Table 6-3. Library Fund Library services are also paid through a separate fund. Library service costs are projected at $11.80 per capita based on the City’s FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget General Fund transfers of $2,633,501 to the Library Fund and the City’s population estimate of 223,230.        Packet Page. 652 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 38 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis APPENDIX A NEIGHBORHOOD INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS Table A-1 Road, Drainage, Sewer. Parks, Trails and Open Space Phasing Spring Trails Specific Plan A-1 Spring Trails Specific Plan, Roads, Drainage, Sewer, Parks, Trails and Open Space Phasing Lane Miles Square Feet Lane Miles Square Feet Lane Miles Square Feet Primary Access Miles/Square Feet 1.04 153,216 0.19 25,188 Secondary Access Miles/Square Feet 2.61 344,789 0.08 10,254 Primary Local Miles/Square Feet 2.96 309,382 0.97 250,669 Secondary Local Miles/Square Feet 0.27 28,275 Cul-De-Sac I Miles/Square Feet 0.63 99,076 0.31 43,960 Cul-De-Sac II Miles/Square Feet 0.84 110,501 2.41 288,137 Total 3.65 498,005 4.70 554,401 3.96 611,041 Public Private Public Private Public Private Detention Basin Square Feet 298,277 178,392 Infiltration Trench Square Feet Reinforced Concrete Box Lineal Feet 1,430 2,286 Reinforced Concrete Pipe Lineal Feet 3,685 7,460 2,378 Arch Culvert Lineal Feet 580 Total Lineal Feet 5,695 9,746 2378 Phase 2 Public Private Public Private Public Private Sewer Main Lineal Feet 4,017 10,857 13,479 Public Private Public Private Open Space Acre 47.4 27 Graded Slopes Acre 25.18 9 12' Pedestrian/Equestrian Trail Lineal Feet 5,700 6,100 4' Hiking Trail Lineal Feet 4,600 2,700 Observation Point Each 3 3 Trailhead Each 2 1 Park Square Feet 57,331 landscaping. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. J. P. Weber Group, October 2016 Roads 1 Road Type Unit of Measure Offsite Onsite (Private) Phase 1 Phase 2 Drainage (Basins, Storm Drain) 2 Facility Type Unit of Measure Offsite Onsite Phase 1 Phase 2 Sewer 3 Facility Type Unit of Measure Offsite Onsite Phase 1 Note: 1. All proposed offsite roads are assumed to be public maintained roads. Road sections are based on the proposed section on the Tentative Map exhibit. All roads are proposed as 2-lane roads. Lane miles are calculated by doubling the centerline length of a road segment. Road square footage is based on the entire road section, from R/W to R/W. 2. Detention basins are measured by square footage of the entire drainage lot. There are 2 basins in Phase 1 and 1 basin in Phase 2. Infiltration Parks, Trails and Open Space 4 Facility Type Unit of Measure Phase 1 Phase 2 trenches are as proposed in the project WQMP and Hydrology Report. RCB quantities are based on the length of the centerline of each cell within a multiple celled box culvert. Arch Culverts are assumed for the Secondary Access Road crossing of Cable Creek. Arch Culverts are also proposed for Street " and Street "DD" crossing of Cable Canyon. 3. Offsite sewer is from the tract boundary on Verdemont Drive to Little League Drive, and in Little League Drive to existing facilities as depicted on the proposed Tentative Map. 4. Parks, Trails and Open Space sections are based on the Trails, Parks, and Open Space Plan in the Spring Trails Specific Plan. Trail lengths are approximate based on the Trails, Parks, and Open Space Plan. Open Space is areas on the Tentative Map that is not impacted by any development activity, except trail grading. Graded Slopes are areas within the proposed open space lots that have proposed grading and        Packet Page. 653 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 39 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis APPENDIX B SUPPORTING FISCAL TABLES Table B-1 (page 1 of 2) General Fund Revenues, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) B-1 General Fund Adopted Revenues, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Revenue Category Total Non-Recurring 1 Not Projected 2 Projected Property Taxes Property Tax In Lieu of VLF $23,000,000 $0 $0 $23,000,000 Sales and Use Tax Sales and Use Tax $51,500,000 $0 $0 $51,500,000 Measure Z - Sales Tax Measure Z - Sales Tax $46,000,000 $0 $0 $46,000,000 Franchise Tax Franchise Tax - So Cal Edison $1,000,000 $0 $0 $1,000,000 Franchise Tax - So Cal Gas 550,000 0 0 550,000 Franchise Tax - Charter Cable TV 1,100,000 0 0 1,100,000 Franchise Tax - Verizon 120,000 0 0 120,000 Franchise Tax - AT&T (Pacific Bell)11,000 0 0 11,000 Franchise Tax - Burrtec Disposal 9,000,000 0 0 9,000,000 Total Franchise Taxes $11,781,000 $0 $0 $11,781,000 Charges For Services On Site Plan Check Fees $425,000 $425,000 $0 $0 Cannabis Permit Application Fee 20,000 20,000 0 0 Cannabis Permit Regulatory Fee 85,000 85,000 0 0 Passport Fees 0 0 0 0 Subdivision Filing Fee 100,000 100,000 0 0 Planning Development PR 650,000 650,000 0 0 Technology Fee Development Services 135,000 135,000 0 0 Plan Review 170,000 170,000 0 0 C&D Application Fee 0 0 0 0 Plan Check Fee - B&S 1,700,000 1,700,000 0 0 Plan Check Fee - Fire 0 0 0 0 Board Up/Demolition 325,000 325,000 0 0 CDBG Revenue 10,000 0 10,000 0 Pendency Release 3,500 0 3,500 0 Miscellaneous Police Receipts 1,200,000 0 0 1,200,000 Sale of Photos 1,500 0 0 1,500 Traffic Offender OTS Fee 150,000 0 0 150,000 Police Tow Release 575,000 0 0 575,000 Private Property Tow Fee 145,000 0 0 145,000 Fingerprint Fee 14,000 0 0 14,000 Property Auction 2,000 0 0 2,000 False Alarm Fee 65,000 0 0 65,000 Vehicle Repossession Fee 5,000 0 0 5,000 Investigation Fee 5,000 0 0 5,000 Fireworks Enforcement 50,000 0 0 50,000 Code SFIF 40,000 40,000 0 0 Administrative Citations SFRPIP 55,000 55,000 0 0 Payoff Demand Fee 0 0 0 0 Crime Free Rental Housing 0 0 0 0 Cemetery Burial Fee 7,500 0 0 7,500 Sale of Cemetery Vaults and Liners 0 0 0 0 Blanket Inspection Fee 225,000 225,000 0 0 Miscellaneous Engineering Receipt 120,000 120,000 0 0 Plan Check Fee - Engineering 1,600,000 1,600,000 0 0 Archival Fee - Development Services 0 0 0 0 NPDES Storm Drain Utility Fee 175,000 175,000 0 0 NPDES Inspection Fee 1,000 1,000 0 0 Weed Abatement Destruction 25,000 0 0 25,000 Program & Facility Use Fees 150,000 0 0 150,000 Park Energy Fee 0 0 0 0 Signal maint/energy 0 0 0 0 Class Registration Fee 5,750 0 0 5,750 Swimming Pool Fee 50,000 0 0 50,000 Burrtec Host Fee 415,000 415,000 0 0 Library Fines 6,000 6,000 0 0 Election Filing Fees 3,000 3,000 0 0 Sale of Vases 500 500 0 0 Non Resident Fee 500 500 0 0 Crime Prevention Revenue 400 400 0 0 Total Charges for Services $8,715,650 $6,251,400 $13,500 $2,450,750        Packet Page. 654 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 40 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table B-1 (page 2 of 2) General Fund Revenues, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) Revenue Category Total Non-Recurring 1 Not Projected 2 Projected Fines and Forfeitures General Fines $15,000 $0 $0 $15,000 Code Administration Citations 69,000 0 0 69,000 Parking Citations 575,000 0 0 575,000 General Administrative Civil Penalty 130,000 0 0 130,000 Police Administrative Civil Penalty 0 0 0 0 PW Administrative Civil Penalty 0 0 0 0 Code Administrative Civil Penalty 465,000 0 0 465,000 Private Property Tow Fee 0 0 0 0 Library Fines 0 0 0 0 City Attorney Administrative Citations 1,500 0 0 1,500 Total Fines and Forfeitures $1,255,500 $0 $0 $1,255,500 Intergovernmental Motor Vehicle In Lieu Tax $145,000 $0 $0 $145,000 Other Governmental Agencies 2,051,260 0 2,051,260 0 State Aid - POST 0 0 0 0 State Mandated Cost Reimbursement 65,000 0 0 65,000 SBIAA Reimbursement 2,000 0 2,000 0 Recoverable Expense Income 1,100,000 0 0 1,100,000 San Manuel Community Credit 1,000,000 0 1,000,000 0 Water Reimbursement 25,000 0 0 25,000 Total Intergovernmental $4,388,260 $0 $3,053,260 $1,335,000 Investment Income Land and Building Rental/Lease $525,000 $0 $525,000 $0 ATS Land and Building Rental 0 0 0 0 Total Use of Money and Property $525,000 $0 $525,000 $0 Licenses and Permits Business Registration $8,000,000 $0 $0 $8,000,000 Miscellaneous Planning Permits 15,000 15,000 0 0 Annual Alarm Permits 50,000 50,000 0 0 Building Permits 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 0 Mechanical Permits 125,000 125,000 0 0 C&D Self Haul Permit 5,000 5,000 0 0 Street Cut Permits 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Licenses and Permits 400,000 400,000 0 0 Grading Permits 15,000 15,000 0 0 Public Works Construction Permits 380,000 380,000 0 0 On Site Permits 1,750,000 1,750,000 0 0 Mobile Home Park Permit 3,000 0 3,000 0 Total Licenses & Permits $12,740,000 $4,740,000 $0 $8,000,000 Miscellaneous Miscellaneous Planning Receipts $125,000 $0 $0 $125,000 Miscellaneous Library Receipts 4,500 0 0 4,500 Miscellaneous Receipts 180,000 0 0 180,000 Refunds and Rebates 6,000 0 0 6,000 Litigation Settlements 60,000 0 0 60,000 Restitutions 0 0 0 0 Water Fund Contributions 793,556 0 0 793,556 Vehicle Take Home Reimbursement 0 0 0 0 DUI Reimbursement 10,000 0 0 10,000 Off-Track Betting 30,000 0 0 30,000 Total Miscellaneous $1,209,056 $0 $0 $1,209,056 Other Taxes Tow Franchise 606,000 $0 $0 $606,000 Transient Occupancy Tax 4,650,000 0 0 4,650,000 Property Transfer Tax 1,100,000 0 0 1,100,000 Sales Tax - Public Safety 1,300,000 0 0 1,300,000 Cannabis Tax 4,000,000 0 0 4,000,000 Total Other Taxes $11,656,000 $0 $0 $11,656,000 Use of Money and Property Interest on Idle Cash $350,000 $0 $350,000 $0 Rental Income From Former EDA Properties 200,000 0 200,000 0 Vending Machine Commission 4,000 0 4,000 0 Total Use of Money and Property $554,000 $0 $554,000 $0 Utility Users Tax Utility Users Tax $21,430,500 $0 $0 $21,430,500 General Fund Total $194,754,966 $10,991,400 $4,145,760 $179,617,806 Note: 1. One-time development related fees are not projected as recurring revenues because they are netted from projected development development services costs. 2. Certain recurring revenues (such as transient occupancy tax, intergovernmental revenues and set payment amounts) that are not impacted by the proposed project are not projected in the fiscal analysis. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget        Packet Page. 655 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 41 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table B-2 Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget: Revenues for Other City Funds 1 Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) B-2 Revenues for Other City Fund, Fiscal Year 2022-23 Revenue Category Total Not Projected 2 Recurring Fund 124 - Animal Control Animal Licenses $210,000 $0 $210,000 Miscellaneous Licenses and Permits 2,500 0 2,500 General Fines 5,200 0 5,200 Animal License Penalty 13,500 0 13,500 Animal Adoption Fee 53,000 0 53,000 Contracted Shelter Fee 0 0 0 Apprehension Fee 11,000 0 11,000 Boarding Fee 0 0 0 Field Service Fee 6,000 0 6,000 Owner Release Fee 13,400 0 13,400 Vaccination Fee 36,000 0 36,000 Microchip Identification Fee 31,000 0 31,000 Miscellaneous Receipts 12,500 0 12,500 Transfers from General Fund 3,306,435 0 3,306,435 Intergovernmental 0 0 0 Total Animal Control Fund $3,700,535 $0 $3,700,535 Fund 126 - Gas Tax State Gasoline Tax: - HUTA Prop 42 Replacement (for Section 2103)$1,608,248 $0 $1,608,248 - Proposition 111 (Section 2105)1,181,427 0 1,181,427 - Section 2106 716,333 0 716,333 - Section 2107 1,502,553 0 1,502,553 Subtotal $5,008,561 $0 $5,008,561 - Section 2107.5 flat amount 3 23,939 0 23,939 Use of Money and Property 5,000 5,000 0 Total Gas Tax Fund $5,037,500 $5,000 $5,032,500 Fund 129 - Measure I 1/2 Cent Sales Tax $4,808,000 $0 $4,808,000 Federal Aid Street Construction 0 0 Subtotal $4,808,000 $0 $4,808,000 Interest on Idle Cash 28,000 28,000 0 Total Gas Tax Fund $4,836,000 $28,000 $4,808,000 1. This table includes only the special fund revenues that are projected in the fiscal analysis. 2. Revenues that are not impacted by the proposed project are not projected as recurring revenues. Also, revenues allocated to capital expenditures and interest on idle cash revenues are not projected. 3. Section 2107.5 gas tax revenues are allocated based on the population size-range population of the City. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget        Packet Page. 656 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 42 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table B-3 Estimated In Lieu Property Tax of Vehicle License Fees (VLF) Factor Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino B-3 Estimated In Lieu Property Tax of Vehicle License Fees (VLF) Factor Table B-4 Calculation of Use Tax Factor Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino B-4 Calculation of Use Tax Factor VLF - Assessed VLF per Fiscal Year Property Tax In Lieu 1 Valuation (AV) 2 $1,000,000 AV 3 2013-2014 $16,328,700 $10,695,499,230 $1,530 2014-2015 $17,249,209 $11,298,819,747 $1,530 2015-2016 $18,206,540 $11,924,444,131 $1,530 2016-2017 $17,844,545 $12,662,283,004 $1,410 2017-2018 $15,000,000 $13,395,373,121 $1,120 2018-2019 $15,800,000 $14,215,676,776 $1,110 2019-2020 $16,805,900 $15,437,323,990 $1,090 2020-2021 $18,316,742 $16,296,056,728 $1,120 2021-2022 $19,267,608 $17,611,502,086 $1,090 2022-2023 $22,500,000 $18,993,544,611 $1,180 Average of Ten Years $1,270 1. The property tax in lieu VLF amounts are from the City's budget as cited below . 2. City assessed valuation is from the County Assessor report as cited below. 3. Estimated VLF per $1,000,000 AV is rounded to the nearest tens. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Adopted Budgets, 2013-2014 through 2022-23. County of San Bernardino, Assessed Rolls, 2013 through 2023 City of San Bernardino Amount 1 Use Tax County Pool $3,539,112 State Pool $10,660 Total Use Tax $3,549,772 divided by Point-of-Sale $23,826,715 equals Use Tax Rate2 14.9% 1. Obtained from CDTFA data for Half-year 2022. 2. The use tax rate is the County Pool plus the State Pool divided by point-of-sale taxable sales tax. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, CDTFA, 2023        Packet Page. 657 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 43 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table B-5 Estimated Annual Residential Turnover Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino B-5 Estimated Annual Residential Turnover Occupied Housing Percent City of San Bernardino Units Turnover Total Owner Occupied Units 32,391 Moved in 2019 or later 5,241 Moved in 2015 to 2018 6,044 Total Moved 2015 to 2021 11,285 Estimated Annual Turnover Rate: 2015 to 2021 1 1,612 5% 1. The annual turnover rate is based on the assumption of seven years for the 2015 to 2021 period. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. U.S. Census Bureau, 2021 American Community Survey (ACS) 1-Year Estimate, Tenure by Year Householder Moved Into Unit, Report B25038, San Bernardino, California        Packet Page. 658 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 44 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis Table B-6 General Fund Net Community and Economic Development Cost Factor Meyers Road Island Area Annexation Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis City of San Bernardino (In Constant 2024 Dollars) B-6 General Fund Net Community Development Cost Factor Category Amount Total General Fund Community and Economic Development Costs $11,923,799 minus Charges for Service On Site Plan Check Fees $425,000 Cannabis Permit Application Fee 20,000 Cannabis Permit Regulatory Fee 85,000 Subdivision Filing Fee 100,000 Planning Development PR 650,000 Technology Fee Development Services 135,000 Plan Review 170,000 C&D Application Fee 0 Plan Check Fee - B&S 1,700,000 Board Up/Demolition 325,000 Blanket Inspection Fee 225,000 Miscellaneous Engineering Receipt 120,000 Plan Check Fee - Engineering 1,600,000 Archival Fee - Development Services 0 NPDES Storm Drain Utility Fee 175,000 NPDES Inspection Fee 1,000 Total One-Time Charges for Service $5,731,000 minus One-Time Licenses and Permits Miscellaneous Planning Permits $15,000 Annual Alarm Permits $50,000 Building Permits 2,000,000 Mechanical Permits 125,000 C&D Self Haul Permit 5,000 Street Cut Permits 0 Miscellaneous Licenses and Permits 400,000 Grading Permits 15,000 Public Works Construction Permits 380,000 On Site Permits 1,750,000 Total One-Time Licenses and Permits $4,740,000 equals Recurring Net Community Development Costs $1,452,799 divided by City Service Population 279,469 equals Community Development Costs per Service Population $5.20 Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. City of San Bernardino, Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget City of San Bernardino, Finance Department        Packet Page. 659 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Meyers Rd Island Annexation, City of San Bernardino July 3, 2024 45 Plan for Service and Fiscal Analysis APPENDIX C PROJECT REFERENCES City of San Bernardino www.sbcity.org/ Community and Economic Development Gabriel Elliot, Director, 909.384.5357 Timothy O’Neal, Senior Management Analyst, 909.384.7276 Travis Martin, Principal Planner, 909.384.5313 Finance Department Jeannie Fortune, Interim Director, 909.384.5242 Former Employees Nathan Freeman, Former Director, Community and Economic Development Marim Fam, Former Deputy Finance Director Rita Conrad, Former Interim Finance Director Brent Mason, Former Finance Director David Murray, Former Deputy Director/City Planner Oliver Mujica, Former Planning Division Manager San Bernardino Municipal Water Department Ted Brunson, Development Services Manager, 909.453.6165 J.P. Weber Group Jeff Weber, Principal, 949.254.0135 Gresham Savage Nolan & Tilden, PC Mark Ostoich, Principal Shareholder, 909.890.4499 Jennifer Dorgan, 909.890.4499 Hinderliter de Llamas and Associates www.hdlcompanies.com San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission 909.388.0480 Samuel Martinez, Executive Officer www.sblafco.com County of San Bernardino www.sbcounty.gov/ San Bernardino City Unified School District Facilities/Operations Division, Facilities Management Takara Russ, Use of Facilities Senior Clerk, 909.388.1600 Omnitrans www.omnitrans.org/        Packet Page. 660 LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION FOR SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 1170 West Third Street, Unit 150, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0490 (909) 388-0480 • Fax (909) 388-0481 lafco@lafco.sbcounty.gov www.sbclafco.org DATE: FROM: TO: OCTOBER 8, 2019 SAMUEL MARTINEZ, Executive Officer LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM #9: LAFCO 3188A -- Reorganization to include Annexation to the City of San Bernardino and to the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District Zone FP-5 San Bernardino, and Detachment from County Service Area 70 (Spring Trails Specific Plan) BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This item was continued from the Commission’s August 21, 2019 hearing at the request of the property owner (with concurrence from the City) to allow the property owner and the City enough time to evaluate and consider the proposed condition(s) that LAFCO staff is recommending. No change has occurred since then; therefore, staff’s recommendations remain the same for LAFCO 3188A. For reference, the original staff report for LAFCO 3188A, dated August 14, 2019, is included as Attachment #1 and includes the links to each attachment. However, the Commission—as part of its motion at the August Hearing—requested that staff provide a discussion regarding access to and from the project site in order to provide for a better understanding of the issues related to traffic (circulation) as well as fire safety. Circulation The Spring Trails project will have two main access points. The primary access road (dash line with pink highlight), which provides the main access to and from Spring Trails project, is a 2-way undivided road that extends from North Little League Drive to the Spring Trails project at the southeastern section of the project site. From North Little League Drive (also a 2-way undivided road), access to the I-215 Freeway can be        Packet Page. 661 Agenda Item #9 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) October 8, 2019 reached from either Palm Avenue (via West Little League Drive or Kendall Avenue) or Devore Road/Glen Helen Parkway (via Kendall Avenue and Cajon Boulevard). The secondary access road (dash line with orange highlight), which is intended as an alternative street for local traffic to access arterial streets outside the project, is also a 2-way undivided road that runs along the western boundary of the Spring Trails project. It will connect to North Little League Drive via Frontage Road. From North Little League Drive, access to the freeway is the same as the primary access road. Fig. 1 – Circulation Map 2        Packet Page. 662 Agenda Item #9 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) October 8, 2019 It should be noted that the intersection of Meyers Road and the secondary access road will be constructed in such a way that either prevents or discourages access to Meyers Road. All necessary public streets, both on-site and off-site (including the extension of North Little League Drive), will be improved by the developer. Other necessary off-site improvements, such as the Palm Avenue/I-215 Freeway and Glen Helen Parkway improvements, are part of the City’s Master Facility Plan and will be funded through developer impact fees. Fire Safety (Hazards) As identified in the original staff report, no change in actual service provider will occur upon completion of the annexation since the City of San Bernardino was annexed into the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (County Fire) and its Valley Service Zone. The area proposed for annexation is already within the boundaries of County Fire. The closest fire station is Station #232 located on 6065 Palm Avenue, which is approximately 2.1 miles away from the project site. The next closest fire station is Station #2 located in Devore (1511 Devore Road), which is approximately 4.2 miles away from the project site. The Spring Trails project evaluated response times for a number of stations using time/distance calculations from the different fire stations to the project site via Meyers Road. Below are the drive times for the two stations nearest the project site: Station MPH Miles Time 1. Station #232 45 25 35 35 0.78 0.16 0.43 0.70 2.07 3.31 3.74 01:02 00:23 00:44 01:12 03.21 05:29 06:13 Meyers Ranch Farthest 2. Station #2 45 35 2.35 1.38 3.75 4.97 5.40 03:08 02:22 05:30 07:38 08:22 Meyers Ranch Farthest Based on the calculations identified in the Spring Trails Fire Protection Plan, Station #232 can reach the farthest portion of the site in 6m 13s and Station #2 can get to the farthest portion of the site in 8m 22s. 3        Packet Page. 663 Agenda Item #9 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) October 8, 2019 LAFCO staff also prepared its own analysis of the drive times from both stations to the farthest portion of the project site using the primary access road and based on actual speed limits. Staff’s analysis indicates that Station #232 can reach the farthest portion of the site in 7m 12s, and Station #2 can get to the farthest portion of the site in 11m 42s. Fig. 2 – Drive Times 4        Packet Page. 664 Agenda Item #9 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) October 8, 2019 The Spring Trails Fire Protection Plan outlines a number of mitigation measures including fuel modification zones, vegetation management guidelines, planting maintenance and spacing guidelines, as well as infrastructure/structural construction features and requirements. COMMENTS RECEIVED: At the August 21, 2019 hearing, the Commission received oral comments. All written comments received prior to and at the August 21 hearing can be accessed on the LAFCO website: • Comments received prior to the August 21, 2019 hearing: http://www.sbcounty.gov/uploads/LAFCO/AgendaNotices/20190821/Item_08_Att1.pdf • Comments received at the August 21, 2019 hearing: http://www.sbcounty.gov/uploads/LAFCO/AgendaNotices/20190821/Item_08_Att3.pdf Since then, additional comments have been received, which are included as Attachment #2 to the staff report. Overall, approximately 80 written comments have been received from landowners, registered voters, and other individuals, including one from a council member of the City of San Bernardino, Mr. Henry Nickel, and one from a non-profit organization. Most of the comments came from residents who live in the Verdemont area within the City of San Bernardino as well as residents from the unincorporated Devore community. Approximately 10 (unverified) letters opposing the project came from the island area itself. Most of the comments relate to fire, high wind, and earthquake issues including limited accessibility during an emergency. School traffic was also cited in some of the letters. Other comments relate to the City’s inability to provide code inspections/enforcement, reduced services and slow response times, and issues related to road repair and maintenance. CONCLUSION: As outlined in the original staff report, the Spring Trails Specific Plan requires a broad range and level of municipal services that are only available through the City of San Bernardino. The project would benefit from the extension of the City’s services as well as the continuation of fire protection and emergency medical response services from County Fire and its Valley Service Zone based upon the anticipated development of 215 (current configuration) single-family residences, open space, parks, and other public facilities. The Spring Trails Specific Plan was approved and adopted by the City with certain guidelines, conditions of approval, and mitigation measures. Therefore, the Commission’s approval of LAFCO 3188A assumes that the City will adhere to the parameters that have been imposed on the Spring Trails Specific Plan and the 5        Packet Page. 665 Agenda Item #9 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) October 8, 2019 mitigation measures outlined in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Spring Trails Specific Plan. However, as noted in the August 14, 2019 staff report, approval of this proposal calls into question the issue related to the adjacent unincorporated area that will become totally-surrounded by the City of San Bernardino. This report provides for options for addressing the creation of said island territory. Staff recommendations are to: • Include a determination required by Government Code Section 56375(m), which can be applied to this proposal; and, • Include a condition that requires the City to initiate the totally-surrounded island area within one year of the Commission’s approval of LAFCO 3188A. For all these reasons, and those outlined throughout this staff report and the original staff report dated August 14, 2019, staff recommends approval of LAFCO 3188A. RECOMMENDATIONS: The staff recommends that the Commission approve LAFCO 3188A by taking the following actions: 1.With respect to the environmental review: a.Certify that the Complete Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and other related environmental documents prepared by the City of San Bernardino for the Spring Trails Specific Plan have been independently reviewed and considered by the Commission, its staff and its Environmental Consultant; b. c. d. Determine that the Complete Final EIR for the project prepared by the City is adequate for the Commission’s use as a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Responsible Agency for its determination related to LAFCO 3188A. Determine that the Commission does not intend to adopt alternatives or additional mitigation measures for the Spring Trails Specific Plan, and that the mitigation measures identified for the project are the responsibility of the City and others, not the Commission; Adopt the Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations as presented by the Commission’s Environmental Consultant and attached to the staff report (Attachment #3); and, 6        Packet Page. 666 Agenda Item #9 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) October 8, 2019 e.Direct the Executive Officer to file the Notice of Determination within five days, and find that no further Department of Fish and Wildlife filing fees are required by the Commission’s approval since the City, as CEQA Lead Agency, has paid said fees. 2.Approve LAFCO 3188A, with the following determination: The Commission determines that approval of LAFCO 3188A will create an unincorporated island completely surrounded by the City of San Bernardino. Since the inclusion of the island area would likely terminate the annexation proposal due to the number of registered voters within said island, the Commission determines, pursuant to the provision of Government Code Section 56375(m), to waive the restrictions on the creation of a totally-surrounded island contained within Government Code Section 56744 because it would be detrimental to the orderly development of the community, and it further determines that the area to be surrounded by the City of San Bernardino cannot reasonably be annexed to another city or incorporated as a new city. 3.Approve LAFCO 3188A with the following conditions: a.The City of San Bernardino shall be required to initiate annexation of the totally-surrounded island within one year of the Commission’s approval of LAFCO 3188A and process under standard protest proceedings. A resolution by the City Council of the City of San Bernardino shall be submitted to the Executive Officer of LAFCO outlining the City’s commitment to fulfilling this requirement prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Completion for LAFCO 3188A. A status report shall be provided to the Commission at the six-month date outlining the progress of the City of San Bernardino in fulfilling its obligation. Failure on the part of the City of San Bernardino to fulfill its commitment to annex the totally- surrounded island shall require that the next annexation proposed to the City of San Bernardino, either by the City through resolution or by property owner/registered voter petition, include a condition requiring the initiation of annexation of the totally-surrounded island. Said condition of approval shall be deemed completed upon the issuance of the Certificate of Filing for said island. b.The standard LAFCO terms and conditions that include, but are not limited to, the “hold harmless” clause for potential litigation costs by the applicant and the continuation of fees, charges, and/or assessments currently authorized by the annexing agency, and the identification that the transfer of utility accounts will occur within 90 days of the recording of the Certificate of Completion. 4.Waive protest proceedings, as permitted by Government Code Section 56662(d), with 100% landowner consent to the reorganization; and, 7        Packet Page. 667 Agenda Item #9 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) October 8, 2019 5.Adopt LAFCO Resolution No. 3291 (Attachment #4) setting forth the Commission’s determinations, terms, and conditions of approval concerning LAFCO 3188A. Attachments: 1. Original Staff Report for LAFCO 3188A Dated August 14, 2019 2. Letters Received After the August 21, 2019 Hearing 3. Letter from Tom Dodson and Associates and Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Environmental Documents Related to the City of San Bernardino’s Approval of the Spring Trails Specific Plan 4. Draft Resolution No. 3291 8        Packet Page. 668 Original Staff Report for LAFCO 3188A Dated August 14, 2019 Attachment 1        Packet Page. 669 LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION FOR SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 1170 West Third Street, Unit 150, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0490 (909) 388-0480  Fax (909) 388-0481 lafco@lafco.sbcounty.gov www.sbclafco.org DATE: FROM: AUGUST 14, 2019 SAMUEL MARTINEZ, Executive Officer MICHAEL TUERPE, Project Manager JEFFERY LUM, LAFCO GIS/Database Analyst ROBERT ALDRICH, Consultant TO:LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION SUBJECT: Agenda Item #8: LAFCO 3188A -- Reorganization to include Annexation to the City of San Bernardino and to the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District Zone FP-5 San Bernardino, and Detachment from County Service Area 70 (Spring Trails Specific Plan) INITIATED BY: Property Owner Petition – Montecito Equities, Ltd., landowner BACKGROUND: The reorganization proposal is an annexation to the City of San Bernardino (hereafter the “City”) and to Zone FP-5 San Bernardino1 of the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District, and detachment from County Service Area 70. The proposal encompasses approximately 350 acres and is generally located north of the Verdemont neighborhood, east of the community of Devore and northeasterly of the I-215 Freeway. The area is bordered by parcel lines on the north and east, a combination of parcel lines and the centerline of West Meyers Road (existing City of San Bernardino boundary) on the south, and parcel lines (portion of existing City boundary) on the west, within the City’s existing sphere of influence. A vicinity map is included as Attachment #1 to this report. The map below (Figure 1) provides a general location of the area to be annexed into the City. For over 20 years, the Local Agency Formation Commission and its staff have been involved in discussions with the City and/or the landowner regarding the delivery of services for a development proposal within the annexation area known as the Spring Trails Specific Plan, or its predecessor—Martin Ranch. 1 The proposal area is already within the San Bernardino County Protection District and its Zone FP-5. The annexation into “Zone FP-5 San Bernardino” would isolate the special tax revenues of Zone FP-5 to the service area of the City.        Packet Page. 670 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 Fig. 1 – Vicinity Map Sphere of Influence Expansion (LAFCO 2808) In 1996, the Commission reviewed and considered a sphere of influence expansion proposal, LAFCO 2808, which was initiated by the property owner to include the proposal area (known then as Martin Ranch) into the City’s sphere of influence (see Figure 2). The Commission approved the sphere expansion proposal noting that future development would logically be served by the City and that the City should assume the primary role in developing the land use and service plans for the area. It was outlined at that time that the approval of the sphere expansion was simply to allow the landowner and the City to move forward in completing the pre- zoning, general plan amendment, and comprehensive Environmental Impact Report for the project. a Fig. 2 – LAFCO 2808 2        Packet Page. 671 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 Project History This primer box provides a history of the project since its inception in 1996. The Spring Trails Specific Plan (or Martin Ranch) is a project that the City of San Bernardino has extensively reviewed, evaluated, and ultimately approved (and/or adopted) after years of processing. The Martin Ranch project was first submitted to the City in 1996. In 1998, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was issued for the project; however, the ensuing Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was rejected by the City’s Planning Department. In December 2002, the application for the General Plan Amendment (GPA 02-09) and Tentative Tract Map (15576) was filed with the City. A revised Draft EIR was released in 2002. In October 2003, a major fire burned through the project site requiring preparation of a new Draft EIR. In 2004, a new NOP reflecting the revised project was issued by the City. It included a general plan amendment and pre-zoning for the project site and the adjacent unincorporated (island) area which designated the area as Planned Residential Development, the establishment of a Hillside Management Overlay District to allow lot size averaging, and a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the project site into approximately 359 lots. However, the 2004 Draft EIR, which addressed traffic, access, as well as other issues, was never circulated for public review. In 2005, the project was again revised to pre-zone the project site to Residential Low and the adjacent unincorporated (island) area to Residential Estate. A new Draft EIR was not released until 2006 when the City released a completed Draft EIR. Significant issues were again raised, and the City opted to prepare a revised Draft EIR to address concerns related to noise, air quality, biological resources, geotechnical issues and fire safety. In 2007, another fire on the site required further changes to the project. A new NOP was released for public review in 2009 along with an Initial Study. In March 2010, the application for the Specific Plan (SP 10-01) was filed with the City. Due to significant technical issues, the revised Draft EIR was not released until July 2011. Applications for a Development Agreement (DA 11-01) and a Development Code Amendment (DCA 12-10) were filed with the City in October 2011 and October 2012, respectively. In November 2012, the City’s Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the component actions for the Spring Trails Specific Plan (except for the Development Agreement portion of the project which was continued at the request of the property owner) but recommended denial of all the actions. In January 2013, the City’s Planning Commission held another public hearing to consider the Development Agreement, and it also recommended denial of the proposed Development Agreement. Finally, on February 19, 2013, the City Council reviewed and considered the Final EIR, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, the Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and the recommendations of the City’s Planning Commission related to the Spring Trails Specific Plan, the General Plan Amendment, the Development Code Amendment, Tentative Tract Map 15576 to subdivide the project site into 304 single-family residential lots and the project’s Development Agreement. The City Council reversed the Planning Commission’s recommendations and approved and/or adopted all actions related to the Spring Trails Specific Plan. 3        Packet Page. 672 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 Prior Proposal (LAFCO 3188) In March 2015, the property owner—Montecito Equities, Ltd—submitted a property owner petition including the application materials for the proposed reorganization to the City (see Attachment #2). The applicant not only requested the annexation of its properties but also included the adjacent unincorporated area totaling approximately 376 acres (see Figure 3). It should be noted that the City (and the applicant) included the adjacent unincorporated area as part of its proposal to prevent the creation of a totally- surrounded unincorporated island territory within the City. This is why the adjacent 26-acre unincorporated area was included in the City’s environmental LAFCO 3188 assessment for the project. However, during the circulation of the Notice of Filing for LAFCO 3188, the Registrar of Voters (ROV) certified on July 2, 2015 that there were 16 registered voters within the reorganization area (see Attachment #3). That changed the annexation proposal from being (initially) an “uninhabited” annexation (less than 12 registered voters) to an “inhabited” annexation which allows for registered voter protest. This also meant likely termination due to registered voter protest—primarily from within the unincorporated island area. As a result, the applicant requested that LAFCO suspend the processing of its application proposal pending the outcome of the voter registration verification process by the ROV. Fig. 3 – LAFCO 3188 Current Proposal (LAFCO 3188A) After almost a year, there still was no resolution from the ROV on the applicant’s request for verification of registered voters within the annexation area. This prompted the applicant to submit a revised application proposal that removed the adjacent unincorporated area from its proposal boundary (see Attachment #4). LAFCO 3188A Figure 4 illustrates the applicant’s revised boundary that excludes the adjacent unincorporated area. Hence, the current proposal, LAFCO 3188A, creates a totally-surrounded island territory within the City. The reason for the delay in processing this proposal since the time it was re-initiated by the applicant was Fig. 4 – LAFCO 3188A 4        Packet Page. 673 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 due to the modifications that had to be incorporated into the Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis to reflect the change in fire service between the City and County Fire, as well as the property tax transfer process between the County and the City. Property Tax Transfer Process In May 2017, both the County and the City were scheduled to approve their respective property tax transfer resolutions; however, the City ended up not agreeing to the exchange and took no action on its property tax transfer resolution at that time. This prompted the dispute resolution process outlined in Revenue and Taxation Code Section 99(e) that requires mediation and/or arbitration. As the Commission is fully aware, the tax sharing formula in San Bernardino County (between the County and cities) is calculated in the same manner as all other annexations. However, because of the City’s unique property tax exchange process with County Fire through its fire reorganization, the City raised questions on whether an alternative formula was appropriate. The County and the City jointly retained a third-party consultant (David Taussig and Associates) to perform an independent financial analysis of the property tax revenues. That process took several months to get underway and was finally completed in June 2018. Negotiations continued until all parties agreed. The City adopted its property tax resolution on March 20, 2019, and the County, likewise, adopted its property tax resolution on May 21, 2019, determining the amount of property tax revenues to be exchanged among the County, the City, and County Fire. BOUNDARIES: The proposal, as submitted by the applicant, includes the annexation of properties solely associated with the Spring Trails Specific Plan and does not include the adjacent unincorporated area that, should LAFCO 3188A be approved by the Commission, will become a totally-surrounded island within the City of San Bernardino. In staff’s view, the Commission has the following options to address the island area: 5        Packet Page. 674 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 Option 1 Option 1 is to approve the proposal, LAFCO 3188A, as submitted by the applicant. This would leave an unincorporated area totally surrounded by the City. Clearly, it would be LAFCO staff’s preference not to create an island. Therefore, if the Commission chooses option 1, LAFCO staff would recommend that the Commission make certain determinations related to the creation of the island, and as a condition of approval require the City to initiate a new reorganization to annex the island area as a separate proposal (see Figure 5). Option 2 The Commission could modify the proposal by expanding LAFCO 3188A to include the unincorporated (island) area adjacent to the proposal area, which would be the exact same area as the prior proposal – LAFCO 3188 (see Figure 6). Fig. 5 – Option 1 As outlined in the earlier discussion related to the prior proposal (LAFCO 3188) on pages 4 and 5, the inclusion of the island area would change the annexation proposal from being an uninhabited annexation to an inhabited annexation since there would be at least 12 registered voters within the modified proposal. From the beginning of the City’s consideration of the Spring Trails project, many have expressed opposition to the project.Since most of the registered voters are from within the island portion of the modified area, the probability of termination of the expanded proposal would be highly likely. Based on the options outlined above, LAFCO staff recommends the Commission choose Option 1.Fig. 6 – Option 2 Although not an ideal boundary, it is LAFCO staff’s position that the imposition of the Condition of Approval related to the island area as well as the Determination related to the creation of the island, allows a mechanism for the Spring Trails Specific Plan, which is an easily identifiable boundary for service delivery, to be annexed into the City of San Bernardino for the services it requires. A detailed comparison of the two options follows on the next two pages. 6        Packet Page. 675 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 Option 1 Applicant’s Proposal Boundary, as Submitted to LAFCO Proposal Boundary and Description: A reorganization of 350 acres to include annexation of only the Spring Trails Specific Plan (shown in red). Pros:  The Commission identified the City as the logical service provider for the area by expanding the City’s sphere of influence in 1996.  Reorganization area will benefit from the extension of City services.  No other agency can logically provide municipal-level services to this area.  Proposal has 100% landowner consent, allowing for the waiver of protest and eliminating the possibility of termination. Cons:Fig. 7 – Option 1  Applicant’s proposal boundary creates an unincorporated island (completely surrounded by the City, shown in yellow) which is prohibited under Government Code §56744, unless certain determinations can be made (see Discussion below).  The landowners and registered voters of the island (being outside the reorganization area) would lack a process to overturn the Commission’s action. Discussion:  Although an island of unincorporated area is being created, the Commission has the statutory ability to waive the restrictions of creating an island (§56744) if it finds that the restrictions would be detrimental to the orderly development of the community and that the areas enclosed by the annexation cannot be reasonably annexed to another city or incorporate as a city. A determination pursuant to §56375 has been included in the Commission’s draft resolution and in the Recommendation portion of this report.  A condition of approval is being recommended that would require the City to initiate a separate reorganization to annex the island within one year of completion of LAFCO 3188A, and undergo standard protest proceedings on said island. The condition is included in the Commission’s draft resolution and in the Recommendation portion of this report. 7        Packet Page. 676 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 Option 2 Expanded Proposal Boundary Expanded Boundary and Description: An expanded reorganization area of 376 acres to include annexation of the Spring Trails Specific Plan (350 acres) and adjacent 26-acre unincorporated area. Pros:  The Commission identified the City as the logical service provider to the area by expanding the City’s sphere of influence in 1996.  Environmental Assessment already includes the adjacent 26-acre unincorporated area.  Spring Trails Specific Plan area will benefit from the extension of City services.  No other agency can logically provide municipal-level services to this area.  Expanded boundary will not create an island.Fig. 8 – Option 2  The proposal would include a protest proceeding whereby island landowners and registered voters could submit a protest to oppose the reorganization in order to overturn the Commission’s action. Cons:  Registered voter opposition within the expanded boundary would likely result in sufficient protest to terminate the reorganization.  Without annexation to the City, the project—which requires municipal services—most likely would not be able to develop. Discussion:  This option is available to the Commission should it choose not to make a determination to waive the restrictions of creating an island.  The Commission would have to continue the item in order to provide proper noticing.  The Spring Trails project and reorganization would be decided by the registered voters within the reorganization area (not the landowners). 8        Packet Page. 677 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 The remainder of this report contains the following information:  Land Use o County designations and City land use/pre-zone designations o Spring Trails Specific Plan o Constraints: fire hazard, fault zone, circulation, high wind areas, flood and drainage  Service Issues and Effects on Other Local Governments  Environmental Considerations  Waiver of Protest Proceedings  Conclusion  Recommendations  Determinations  Attachment Listing LAND USE: The reorganization area is predominantly vacant with the exception of an existing single- family residence on one of the parcels (see Figure 9). The area is surrounded by a combination of National Forest boundary and vacant lands to the east; a combination of residential development including Meyers Road to the south; a combination of residential development, vacant lands, and the National Forest boundary to the west; and the National Forest boundary to the north. Fig. 9 – Aerial Map 9        Packet Page. 678 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 County Land Use Designations: The County’s current land use designations for the reorganization area are: RL-5 (Rural Living, 5 acres minimum), which provides sites for rural residential uses and incidental agricultural uses; and RC (Resource Conservation), which provides sites for open space and recreational activities, and single-family homes on large parcels. City’s Land Use/Pre-zone Designation(s): The City of San Bernardino has assigned the reorganization area as Spring Trails Specific Plan District and has been pre-zoned the area as “Specific Plan No. 10-01, Spring Trails” under its Special Purpose Zones through the City’s consideration of Ordinance No. MC- 1386, which was adopted on March 5, 2013. The underlying Spring Trails Specific Plan zoning designations within the reorganization area are Residential (Estate), Open Space, and Parks, which will take effect upon completion of the annexation process. The Spring Trails Specific Plan zone designations are the pre-zoning for the proposal area as required by Government Code §56375(a)(7). Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code §56375(e), these zoning designations shall remain in effect for a period of two (2) years following annexation unless specific actions are taken by the City Council at a public hearing. The Spring Trails Specific Plan The Spring Trails Specific Plan (Included as Attachment #5), is a proposed development within the 350-acre annexation area that was approved by the City Council of the City of San Bernardino in February 2013. At that time the Specific Plan was approved by the City, it contemplated development of 307 new single-family residential lots on approximately 242 acres and the remainder area for open space, parks, slopes, and other uses (see Figure 10). 10        Packet Page. 679 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 Fig. 10 – Original Development Plan Fig. 11 – Current Development Plan However, since the City’s approval of the Specific Plan, the land area to be developed and the total number of residential lots have been reduced. Through subsequent analysis of the geology and soils within the Specific Plan area, it has been determined by the landowner that it is only feasible to construct 215 residential lots, and the land area to be developed has been significantly reduced from 242 acres to 199 acres (see Figure 11). The Current Development Plan configuration is also included as part of Attachment #1. Constraints Development of the Spring Trails Specific Plan includes a number of challenges that the Commission should be aware of given the location of the project. Below is a summary of some, but not all, of the constraints associated with the Spring Trails Specific Plan. The Spring Trails is on the northern edge of the City in the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains. The area is generally bounded by the San Bernardino National Forest on three sides and the elevation of the site ranges from approximately 2,010 feet above sea level at its southern boundary to approximately 3,540 feet at the northern boundary. The topography of the site varies from steep (over 30% slopes) in the north and southeast portions of the site to gentle (0–15% slopes) in the central portion of the site. The site slopes to the southwest at approximately 10 to 15%. 11        Packet Page. 680 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 Fire Hazard Because the San Bernardino National Forest is adjacent to the project site, with steep slopes and high winds, the Spring Trails Specific Plan area is at risk from wildland fires (see Figure 12). The Foothill Fire Zone Overlay District identifies three fire zones with different degrees of hazard based on slope, type of fuel, and natural barriers. Approximately one third of the site is in Fire Zone A (Extreme Hazard with slopes 30% or greater), one third of the site is in Fire Zone B (High Hazard with slopes of 15–30%), and the remaining third is in Fire Zone C (Moderate Hazard with slopes of 0–15%). As noted in the Spring Trails Specific Plan, areas in the Foothill Fire Zones are required to be developed with proper building separation, landscaping, and building materials; adequate emergency access and evacuation routes; and sufficient water resources.Fig. 12 – Topography (Fire Zones) The recommended preventative measures are incorporated in the Specific Plan as standards for fuel modification zones, setbacks, landscaping methods/materials, construction materials/methods, and building protection systems. The Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Specific Plan also outlines mitigation measures on fire safety. Fault Zone The site includes three traces of the San Andreas Fault zone, which runs in a general east–west direction (see Figure 13). As noted in the Spring Trails Specific Plan, the southern portion of the site is traversed by two faults: the main trace of the San Andreas Fault and a secondary trace just north of the main trace. The fault zone of the main trace ranges from approximately 50 feet to 150 feet wide and the fault zone of the secondary trace is approximately 40 feet wide. The Spring Trails Specific Plan has been designed to comply with the requirements of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, which prevents the construction of buildings within 50 feet of active faults. Setbacks and additional fault studies are included as mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Spring Trails Specific Plan. Fig. 13 – Earthquake Faults 12        Packet Page. 681 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 Circulation Spring Trails require two points of access that directly connect to collector roads and avoid existing neighborhoods. The primary access road to Spring Trails will be through the southeast corner of the project site via a street extending from Little League Drive to the project site. Secondary access to Spring Trails will be via a street extending from the western edge of the project site to a frontage road along the I-215 Freeway. The secondary access road is designed to restrict non-resident access onto Meyers Road. The Mitigation Monitoring Program outlines mitigation measures to address wildlife corridors. High Wind Areas The City of San Bernardino experiences periods of high velocity winds, especially in the Cajon Pass and at the bottoms of canyons. Spring Trails is included in the City’s designated High Wind Area, which has certain building standards. Development will be required to comply with the building standards for this area. The Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Specific Plan outlines development guidelines for high wind areas. Flooding and Drainage Because Spring Trails sits on an alluvial plain on the slopes of the San Bernardino Mountains, flooding and drainage are also critical factors. Spring Trails is designed to avoid grading or construction of residences in the flood plains. These are just some of the constraints associated with the Spring Trails Specific Plan. LAFCO staff emphasizes the importance of the mitigation measures being implemented to minimize or reduce the impacts. These mitigation measures must be implemented by the City to allow development of the project. However, the Commission has no direct responsibility in implementing these mitigation measures. 13        Packet Page. 682 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 SERVICE ISSUES AND EFFECTS ON OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: In every consideration for jurisdictional change, the Commission is required to look at the existing and proposed service providers within an area. Due to the vacant nature of the lands currently, government service requirements are minimal – primarily law enforcement and fire protection. The current service providers within the reorganization area include the California Highway Patrol for law enforcement along existing roadways in unincorporated areas, County of San Bernardino, San Bernardino County Fire Protection District, its Valley Service Zone, and its Zone FP-5, and County Service Area 70 (unincorporated, multi- function entity). In addition, the regional independent special districts, Inland Empire Resource Conservation District and the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (State Water Contractor), overlay the reorganization area. Plan for Service: The City of San Bernardino has provided a “Plan for Service” for this proposal as required by law and Commission policy. The Plan includes a Fiscal Impact Analysis outlining its ability to provide its range of services and ongoing maintenance and operation to the area given the anticipated revenues and expenditures associated with the project. Also included with the materials for review is the Development Agreement approved by the City and the applicant, outlining land use assumptions, financing and service requirements for the reorganization area. The City of San Bernardino’s certified Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis and its Municipal Water Department’s certification of the Plan for Service are included as Attachment #6 to this report. In general, the Plan identifies the following:  Water Service: Water service will be provided by the City’s Municipal Water Department, as outlined in its Plan for Service. Current storage facilities nearest to Spring Trails is the Meyers Canyon Reservoir, but is not adequate for buildout of Spring Trails. Therefore, water will be supplied to Spring Trails by a combination of expanding and improving the offsite water systems and the provision of onsite reservoirs and transmission lines. The City’s Municipal Water Department outlines the need for the developer to enter into an agreement with Department and provide its share of funding to construct the infrastructure necessary to serve the new pressure zones. In addition, the developer must enter into a developer-installed agreement and provide a performance bond to install the required transmission and distribution mains for construction.  Sewer Service: There is no sewage collection system within the area at the present time. The Sewer Capacity Study concludes that the City’s existing sewer system has the capacity to accommodate the project. The City’s wastewater collection system has transferred from the City’s Public Works to the City’s Municipal Water Department. 14        Packet Page. 683 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 Spring Trails would connect to the existing 10-inch main located on Little League Drive. The only offsite improvement that may be required is in North Little League Drive, which may be upgraded from an 8-inch to a 10-inch main.  Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Response: In 2016, the City of San Bernardino was annexed into the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (County Fire), its Valley Service Zone, and its Zone FP-5 for fire protection and emergency medical response services. The area being annexed is already within the boundaries of County Fire; therefore, fire protection and emergency medical response services will continue to be provided by County Fire and its Valley Service Zone. No change in actual service provider will occur upon completion of the annexation. The entire LAFCO 3188A is currently designated as State Responsibility Area (SRA) lands. This designation would be removed upon annexation to the City and the financial burden for fire protection becomes a responsibility of the City. Fire stations and equipment of the City have since been transferred to County Fire through the City’s fire reorganization. The closest fire station is Station 232 (6065 Palm Avenue) located approximately two miles away from the project site. Water facilities for fire protection will meet water flow demands for the project. As a result of the County Fire reorganizations, one of the conditions that was agreed upon was to account for the special tax generated from within the different areas being annexed into County Fire by creating subzones of County Fire’s Service Zone FP-5. In the case for the City, Zone FP-5 San Bernardino was created to isolate said funding generated from the City. Therefore, LAFCO 3188A includes annexation to Zone FP-5 San Bernardino as part of the overall reorganization in order to isolate the funding generated from reorganization area within the City of San Bernardino.  Law Enforcement: Law enforcement responsibilities will shift from the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department to the City of San Bernardino Police Department. The area is served by a main police station located at 710 North D Street, and four designated geographical patrol districts. The project area is within the City’s patrol beat B1 in the Northwest Patrol District.  Park and Recreation: Regional park and recreation services are currently provided by the County Regional Parks system. The closest regional park is Glen Helen Regional Park, which has various recreation activities. Due to the primarily vacant nature of the reorganization area, local park amenities are not currently provided. The City of San Bernardino has a variety of parks and recreation facilities. The closest City park is the Al Guhin Park located approximately 1.3 miles from the 15        Packet Page. 684 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 proposal area. The Spring Trails project plans to develop neighborhood parks, natural open space, as well as pedestrian/equestrian trails.  Solid Waste Solid waste services are currently provided by Burrtec Industries within the reorganization area and within the City of San Bernardino (by contract). No change in service provider will occur through the annexation.  Schools The area is within the San Bernardino City Unified School District (SBCUSD). Upon annexation, SBCUSD will continue to be the school district with North Verdemont Elementary School, Chavez Middle School, and Cajon High School. As required by Commission policy and State law, the Plan for Service submitted by the City of San Bernardino and its Municipal Water Department show that the extension of the City’s services to the reorganization area are required to provide the level of service anticipated by the Spring Trails Specific Plan. Such service extensions will exceed current service levels provided through the County as the area is primarily vacant at the present time. 16        Packet Page. 685 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: The City’s processing of the Spring Trails Specific Plan project included the preparation and certification of an Environmental Impact Report that was finalized by the City in 2013. LAFCO’s Environmental Consultant, Tom Dodson and Associates, has reviewed the City’s Complete Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which includes the Draft EIR and the Final EIR, and indicated that the City’s environmental documents are adequate for the Commission’s use as a responsible agency for LAFCO 3188A. Copies of the City’s Complete Final EIR and all associated documents, were provided to Commissioners on July 22, 2019. Mr. Dodson has indicated in his letter to the Commission, included as Attachment #9 to this report, the actions that are appropriate for the review of LAFCO 3188A, which are:  Certify that the Commission, its staff, and its Environmental Consultant have individually reviewed and considered the environmental assessment for the Spring Trails Specific Plan prepared by the City of San Bernardino;  Determine that the Complete Final EIR is adequate for the Commission’s use in making its decision related to LAFCO 3188A;  Determine that the Commission does not intend to adopt alternatives or additional mitigation measures for the project; that the mitigation measures identified in the City’s environmental documents for the Spring Trails project are the responsibility of the City and others, not the Commission;  Adopt the Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations as presented by Mr. Dodson, which are the conclusions made regarding the significance of a project in light of the impacts and mitigation measures that have been identified. A copy of this Statement is included as a part of Attachment #9 to this report; and,  Direct the Executive Officer to file the Notice of Determination within five days and find that no further Department of Fish and Wildlife filing fees are required by the Commission’s approval since the City, as lead agency, has paid said fees. WAIVER OF PROTEST PROCEEDINGS: The reorganization area is legally uninhabited (as determined by the Registrar of Voters office) and LAFCO staff verified that the study area possesses 100% landowner consent to the annexation. Therefore, if the Commission approves LAFCO 3188A and none of the affected agencies have submitted written opposition to a waiver of protest proceedings, staff is recommending that protest proceedings be waived. The actions would include direction to the Executive Officer to complete the reorganization following completion of the mandatory reconsideration period of 30-days. 17        Packet Page. 686 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 CONCLUSION: In the mid-90s, the applicant already began planning the development of its landholdings that encompass the Spring Trails Specific Plan area. This began by a request to LAFCO for expansion of the City’s sphere of influence in 1996. The first development project was originally called “Martin Ranch”. As noted in the History Section of this report, the prior Martin Ranch and the current Spring Trails Specific Plan has been in the making for more than 20 years with numerous changes to the project description and multiple Draft EIRs prepared and revised since its inception. The final project approved and/or adopted by the City of San Bernardino, which is the Spring Trails Specific Plan, requires a broad range and level of municipal services that are only available through the City of San Bernardino. The reorganization area will benefit from the extension of the City’s services as well as the continuation of fire protection and emergency medical response services from the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District and its Valley Service Zone based upon the anticipated development of 215 (current configuration) single-family residences, open space, parks, and other public facilities. The Spring Trails Specific Plan was approved and adopted by the City with certain guidelines, conditions of approval, and mitigation measures. Therefore, the Commission’s approval of LAFCO 3188A assumes that the City will adhere to the parameters that have been imposed on the Spring Trails Specific Plan and the mitigation measures outlined in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Spring Trails Specific Plan. However, approval of this proposal calls into question the issue related to the adjacent unincorporated area that will become totally-surrounded by the City of San Bernardino. This report provides for options for addressing the creation of said island territory. Staff recommendations are to:  Include a determination required by Government Code Section 56375(m), which can be applied to this proposal; and,  Include a condition that requires the City to initiate the totally-surrounded island area within one year of the Commission’s approval of LAFCO 3188A. For all these reasons, and those outlined throughout the staff report, staff recommends approval of LAFCO 3188A. However, should the Commission choose Option 2 (to expand the proposal) then the Commission would have to continue the item in order to provide proper noticing. 18        Packet Page. 687 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 RECOMMENDATIONS: The staff recommends that the Commission approve LAFCO 3188A by taking the following actions: 1.With respect to the environmental review: a.Certify that the Complete Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and other related environmental documents prepared by the City of San Bernardino for the Spring Trails Specific Plan have been independently reviewed and considered by the Commission, its staff and its Environmental Consultant; b. c. Determine that the Complete Final EIR for the project prepared by the City is adequate for the Commission’s use as a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Responsible Agency for its determination related to LAFCO 3188A. Determine that the Commission does not intend to adopt alternatives or additional mitigation measures for the Spring Trails Specific Plan, and that the mitigation measures identified for the project are the responsibility of the City and others, not the Commission; d. e. Adopt the Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations as presented by the Commission’s Environmental Consultant and attached to the staff report; and, Direct the Executive Officer to file the Notice of Determination within five days, and find that no further Department of Fish and Wildlife filing fees are required by the Commission’s approval since the City, as CEQA Lead Agency, has paid said fees. 2.Approve LAFCO 3188A, with the following determination: The Commission determines that approval of LAFCO 3188A will create an unincorporated island completely surrounded by the City of San Bernardino. Since the inclusion of the island area would likely terminate the annexation proposal due to the number of registered voters within said island, the Commission determines, pursuant to the provision of Government Code Section 56375(m), to waive the restrictions on the creation of a totally-surrounded island contained within Government Code Section 56744 because it would be detrimental to the orderly development of the community, and it further determines that the area to be surrounded by the City of San Bernardino cannot reasonably be annexed to another city or incorporated as a new city. 3.Approve LAFCO 3188A with the following conditions: a.The City of San Bernardino shall be required to initiate annexation of the totally-surrounded island within one year of the Commission’s approval of LAFCO 3188A and process under standard protest proceedings. A resolution by the City Council of the City of San Bernardino shall be submitted to the Executive Officer of LAFCO outlining the City’s commitment to fulfilling this 19        Packet Page. 688 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 requirement prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Completion for LAFCO 3188A. A status report shall be provided to the Commission at the six month date outlining the progress of the City of San Bernardino in fulfilling its obligation. Failure on the part of the City of San Bernardino to fulfill its commitment to annex the totally-surrounded island shall require that the next annexation proposed to the City of San Bernardino, either by the City through resolution or by property owner/registered voter petition, include a condition requiring the initiation of annexation of the totally-surrounded island. Said condition of approval shall be deemed completed upon the issuance of the Certificate of Filing for said island. b.The standard LAFCO terms and conditions that include, but are not limited to, the “hold harmless” clause for potential litigation costs by the applicant and the continuation of fees, charges, and/or assessments currently authorized by the annexing agency, and the identification that the transfer of utility accounts will occur within 90 days of the recording of the Certificate of Completion. 3. 4. Waive protest proceedings, as permitted by Government Code Section 56662(d), with 100% landowner consent to the reorganization; and, Adopt LAFCO Resolution No. 3291 setting forth the Commission’s determinations, terms, and conditions of approval concerning LAFCO 3188A. 20        Packet Page. 689 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 DETERMINATIONS: The following determinations are required to be provided by Commission policy and Government Code Section 56668 for any changes of organization/reorganization proposal: 1. The reorganization proposal is legally uninhabited containing four (4) registered voters within the reorganization area as certified by the Registrar of Voters as of July 22, 2019. 2. The County Assessor’s Office has determined that the total assessed value of land and improvements within the reorganization area is $1,978,576 (land--$1,876,890; improvements--$101,686) as of August 9, 2019. 3. The reorganization area is within the sphere of influence of the City of San Bernardino. 4. Legal advertisement of the Commission’s consideration has been provided through publication in The Sun, a newspaper of general circulation within the reorganization area. As required by State law, individual notice was provided to affected and interested agencies, County departments, and those individual and agencies having requested such notice. 5. In accordance with State law and adopted Commission policies, LAFCO has provided individual notice to:  landowners (2) and registered voters (4) within the reorganization area (totaling 6 notices); and,  landowners (84) and registered voters (96) surrounding the reorganization area (totaling 180 notices). Included as Attachment #7 to this report is a comment letter received by LAFCO staff from an area resident prior to the publication of the report. The letter outlines concerns related to the project such as fire safety (e.g. housing densities, slope issues, and previous fires in the area, etc.), issues regarding the access roads (e.g. roads built on fault lines, vehicle trips per day, etc.), and issues related to services from the City as well as utilities across fault lines. Comments from landowners and registered voters and any affected local agency in support or opposition will be reviewed and considered by the Commission in making its determination. 6. The City of San Bernardino adopted the Spring Trails Specific Plan (SP #10-01) along with a General Plan Amendment (GPA #02-09) and a Development Code Amendment (DCA #12-10), which pre-zoned the reorganization area as Spring Trails Specific Plan with the following underlying specific plan zone designations: Residential (Estate), Open Space, and Parks. These pre-zone/specific plan zone 21        Packet Page. 690 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 designations are consistent with the City’s General Plan and are generally compatible with surrounding land uses within the City and in the County. Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 56375(e), these pre-zone designations shall remain in effect for two years following annexation unless specific actions are taken by the City Council. 7. The Southern California Associated Governments (SCAG) adopted its 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP-SCS) pursuant to Government Code Section 65080. LAFCO 3188A is in close proximity with the I-215 Freeway, which is part of the RTP-SCS’s highway improvement (expansion/rehabilitation) program adding high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes between the I-210 and the I-15 Freeways for completion by 2035. 8. The City of San Bernardino adopted an updated Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) in October 2016 (Resolution No. 2016-209), which was developed by County Fire, the City’s fire service provider. Said LHMP includes the Spring Trails project as one its potential residential development. County Fire also has its Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan that was approved by FEMA in July 2017. Information contained in the Safety Element of the City’s General Plan related to Urban and Wildland Fires is included as Attachment #8. 9.As a CEQA responsible agency, the Commission’s Environmental Consultant, Tom Dodson of Tom Dodson and Associates, has reviewed the City’s environmental documents for the reorganization proposal and has indicated that the City’s environmental assessment for the Spring Trails Specific Plan are adequate for the Commission’s use as CEQA responsible agency. Copies of the City’s Complete Final EIR and all associated documents were provided to Commission members on July 22, 2019 and are also included (as web links) as part of Attachment #9 to this report (Environmental Documents Related to the City of San Bernardino’s Approval of the Spring Trails Specific Plan). Mr. Dodson has prepared his recommended actions for LAFCO 3188A, which are outlined in the narrative portion of the Environmental Considerations section (page 17 of the staff report). Attachment #9 also includes the Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations that has been prepared for the Commission’s use in addressing this project. 10.The reorganization area is presently served by the following public agencies: County of San Bernardino Inland Empire Resource Conservation District San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District San Bernardino County Fire Protection District, its Valley Service Zone, and its Zone FP-5 (fire protection and emergency medical response) County Service Area 70 (multi-function unincorporated County-wide) 22        Packet Page. 691 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 The area will be detached from County Service Area 70 and its sphere of influence reduced as a function of the reorganization. None of the other agencies are affected by this proposal as they are regional in nature. 11.A plan was prepared for the extension of services to the reorganization area, as required by law. The Plan for Service and the Fiscal Impact Analysis, as certified by the City and its Municipal Water Department, indicates that the City can maintain and/or improve the level and range of services currently available in the area. A copy of this plan is included as a part of Attachment #6 to this report. The Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis have been reviewed and compared with the standards established by the Commission and the factors contained within Government Code Section 56668. The Commission finds that the Plan for Service and the Fiscal Impact Analysis conform to those adopted standards and requirements. The Plan indicates that the revenues to be provided through the transfer of property tax revenues and existing and potential financing mechanisms are anticipated to be sufficient to provide for the infrastructure and ongoing maintenance and operation of the services to be provided from the City of San Bernardino and its Municipal Water Department as well as the services from the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District and its Valley Service Zone. A copy of the Plan for Service is included as a part of Attachment #6 to this report. 12.The reorganization proposal complies with Commission policies and directives and State law that indicate the preference for areas proposed for urban intensity development to be included within a City so that the full range of municipal services can be planned, funded, extended, and maintained. However, approval of this proposal will create an island of unincorporated territory that will be totally-surrounded by the City of San Bernardino. 13. 14. 15. The reorganization area can benefit from the availability and extension of municipal- level services from the City of San Bernardino and its Municipal Water Department, as evidenced by the Plan for Service certified by the City. This proposal will have an effect on the City of San Bernardino’s ability to achieve its fair share of the regional housing needs as it proposes to build the addition of 215 single-family residential units. With respect to environmental justice, which is the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the location of public facilities and the provision of public services, the following demographic and income profile was generated using ESRI’s Community Analyst for the City of San Bernardino and the reorganization and adjacent unincorporated areas (2019 data): 23        Packet Page. 692 Agenda Item #8 – LAFCO 3188A City of San Bernardino Reorganization (Spring Trails SP) August 14, 2019 Demographic and Income Comparison City of San Bernardino (%) Reorganization Area and Adjacent Unincorporated Area (%) Race and Ethnicity • African American Alone • American Indian Alone • Asian Alone • Pacific Islander Alone • Hispanic Origin (Any Race) Median Household Income 13.5 % 1.3 % 4.2 % 0.4 % 68.3 % $43,515 7.0 % 0.9 % 4.3 % 0.3 % 37.9 % $104,564 Through future development, the reorganization area will benefit from the extension of services and facilities from the City and, at the same time, the approval of the reorganization proposal will not result in the unfair treatment of any person based on race, culture or income. 16.The County of San Bernardino (for itself and acting on behalf of the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District) and the City of San Bernardino have successfully negotiated a transfer of property tax revenues that will be implemented upon completion of this reorganization. This fulfills the requirements of Section 99 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. 17.The maps and legal descriptions, as revised, are in substantial compliance with LAFCO and State standards through certification by the County Surveyor's Office. SM/ Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map, Reorganization Map, and Current Development Plan Configuration 2. Applicant’s Landowner Petition and Application Documents 3. ROV Certification of Registered Voters within LAFCO 3188 Dated July 2, 2015 4. Letter from Applicant Dated June 22, 2016 Regarding Resubmittal of Application 5. Spring Trails Specific Plan and Recorded Development Agreement 6. City of San Bernardino’s Certified Plan for Service/Fiscal Impact Analysis, Certification from the City’s Municipal Water Department 7. Comment Letter Received Prior to Staff Report Publication 8. Safety Element Portion of the City’s General Plan related to Urban and Wildland Fires 9. Letter from Tom Dodson and Associates and Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Environmental Documents Related to the City of San Bernardino’s Approval of the Spring Trails Specific Plan 10. Draft Resolution No. 3291 for LAFCO 3188A 24        Packet Page. 693 Letters Received After the August 21, 2019 Hearing Attachment 2        Packet Page. 694        Packet Page. 695        Packet Page. 696        Packet Page. 697        Packet Page. 698        Packet Page. 699        Packet Page. 700        Packet Page. 701        Packet Page. 702        Packet Page. 703        Packet Page. 704        Packet Page. 705        Packet Page. 706        Packet Page. 707        Packet Page. 708        Packet Page. 709        Packet Page. 710        Packet Page. 711        Packet Page. 712        Packet Page. 713        Packet Page. 714        Packet Page. 715        Packet Page. 716        Packet Page. 717        Packet Page. 718        Packet Page. 719        Packet Page. 720        Packet Page. 721        Packet Page. 722        Packet Page. 723        Packet Page. 724        Packet Page. 725        Packet Page. 726        Packet Page. 727        Packet Page. 728        Packet Page. 729        Packet Page. 730        Packet Page. 731        Packet Page. 732        Packet Page. 733        Packet Page. 734        Packet Page. 735        Packet Page. 736        Packet Page. 737        Packet Page. 738        Packet Page. 739        Packet Page. 740        Packet Page. 741        Packet Page. 742        Packet Page. 743        Packet Page. 744        Packet Page. 745        Packet Page. 746        Packet Page. 747        Packet Page. 748        Packet Page. 749        Packet Page. 750        Packet Page. 751        Packet Page. 752        Packet Page. 753        Packet Page. 754        Packet Page. 755        Packet Page. 756        Packet Page. 757        Packet Page. 758        Packet Page. 759        Packet Page. 760        Packet Page. 761        Packet Page. 762        Packet Page. 763        Packet Page. 764        Packet Page. 765 Letter from Tom Dodson and Associates and Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Environmental Documents Related to the City of San Bernardino’s approval of the Spring Trails Specific Plan Attachment 3        Packet Page. 766 TOM DODSON & ASSOCIATES Mailing Address: PO Box 2307, San Bernardino, CA 92406-2307 Physical Address: 2150 N. Arrowhead Avenue, San Bernardino, CA 92405 Tel: (909) 882-3612 ✦ Fax: (909) 882-7015 ✦ Email: tda@tdaenv.com July 31, 2019 Mr. Samuel Martinez Executive Officer Local Agency Formation Commission 1170 West 3rd Street, Unit 150 San Bernardino, CA 92415-0490 Dear Sam: LAFCO 3188A consists of a request by the City of San Bernardino (City) for a Reorganization to include Annexation to the City and to the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District Zone FP-5 San Bernardino, and Detachment from County Service Area 70 (Spring Trails Specific Plan). The proposed Reorganization area consists of approximately 350 acres located generally east of Devore and northeasterly o the I-215 Freeway. The property and current City of San Bernardino boundary is shown on the attached aerial photo of the project area. The Reorganization area is within the City of San Bernardino northern Sphere of Influence. If the Commission approves LAFCO 3188A, the project site can be developed under the Spring Trails Specific Plan which currently proposes 215 new residential lots. The City of prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR, SCH No. 2009111086) and certified the Final EIR on February 19, 2013 for this project to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and State CEQA Guidelines. This document concluded that implementation of the proposed residential development in accordance with the adopted Specific Plan would result in significant adverse environmental impacts to the environment even after implementation of a number of mitigation measures that all fall within the City’s jurisdiction. Because the EIR identified unavoidable significant adverse environmental impacts, the City adopted a Facts, Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations weighing the project benefits with the identified adverse environmental impacts. LAFCO was identified as one of the Responsible Agencies under CEQA for this proposed Reorganization. As a CEQA Responsible Agency, LAFCO is required to rely upon the EIR certified by the City of San Bernardino in 2013. One of the requirements for utilizing a certified EIR by a Responsible Agency is to verify that the original document is still adequate for use when the agency considers the EIR for the action evaluated in the EIR. In this case the Reorganization is an essential step in the final approval process for implementing the residential development entitled by the Spring Trails Specific Plan. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 allows an original document to be used by a Responsible Agency under the following conditions: Under Section 15162, a subsequent EIR or negative declaration is required only when: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;        Packet Page. 767 (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the EIR due to the involvement of any new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous negative declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. I have reviewed the original EIR to determine whether any substantial changes have occurred during the intervening six (6) years that would result in any new significant impacts or greater impacts than identified in this document. In fact, one major change in the project would substantially reduce all impacts of the proposed project. The original project would have resulted in 242 acres of development and 111 acres of open space. The total number of residential units approved by the City was 307. Due to additional geology and soil data obtained subsequent to the EIR’s certification, the project design was revised. The current design will allow about 199 acres to be developed and an estimated 154 acres will be retained in open space and other non-residential uses. The total number of residential units now proposed is 215. This substantial reduction in the number of units, plus positive changes in air emission reductions and overall project footprint provide assurance that the project that would be allowed to proceed after annexation will have less overall impact than the originally approved project. Therefore, I recommend that the Commission rely upon the City’s EIR as adequate for LAFCO’s Responsible Agency CEQA environmental determination. Further, I am recommending that the Commission consider the certified EIR as a CEQA Responsible Agency as the appropriate CEQA environmental determination for LAFCO 3188A. Based on a review of LAFCO 3188A and the pertinent sections of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, I believe it is appropriate for the Commission's CEQA environmental determination to cite the City’s EIR as adequate documentation in accordance with the Commission's CEQA Responsible Agency status. The Notice of Determination for the project was filed on February 19, 2013. Based on a field review of the site and review of the environmental issues in the City’s document, no substantial changes in circumstances have occurred since its adoption that would require additional environmental documentation or review. Under this situation, I recommend that the Commission take the following steps if it chooses to approve LAFCO 3188A, acting as a CEQA Responsible Agency:        Packet Page. 768 1. 2. Indicate that the Commission staff and environmental consultant have independently reviewed the City's EIR and found them adequate for the City’s proposed Reorganization. The Commission needs to indicate that it has considered the EIR and environmental effects, as outlined in the EIR, prior to reaching a decision on the project and finds the information substantiating the EIR adequate for approval of the Reorganization. 3.The Commission should indicate that it does not intend to adopt alternatives or mitigation measures for this project. Mitigation measures were required for this project and they will remain the responsibility of the City to implement. 4. 5. Adopt the Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations. File a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk of the Board as a CEQA Responsible Agency. If you have any questions regarding these recommendations, please feel free to give me a call. Sincerely, Tom Dodson TD/cmc        Packet Page. 769 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Spring Trails Specific Plan August 2019 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 770 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. PROJECT SUMMARY........................................................................................................ 1 A. Site Location................................................................................................................ 1 B. Project Description. .................................................................................................... 2 C. Actions Covered by the EIR....................................................................................... 8 D. Project Objectives ....................................................................................................... 9 II. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ............................. 10 III. INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT FINDING ....................................................................... 11 A. General Finding On Mitigation Measures.............................................................. 11 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS ........................................................ 12 A. Impacts Identified as Less Than Significant Requiring No Mitigation. .............. 12 1. Aesthetics. ............................................................................................................ 12 2. Air Quality........................................................................................................... 18 3. Biological Resources. .......................................................................................... 21 4. Cultural Resources.............................................................................................. 22 5. Geology and Soils................................................................................................ 23 6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials.................................................................... 28 7. Hydrology/Water Quality .................................................................................. 30 8. Land Use and Planning. ..................................................................................... 40 9. Mineral Resources. ............................................................................................. 46 10. Noise. .................................................................................................................... 46 11. Population and Housing. .................................................................................... 53 12. Public Services..................................................................................................... 56 13. Recreation............................................................................................................ 60 14. Traffic Impacts.................................................................................................... 62 15. Utilities and Service Systems.............................................................................. 63 16. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. ............................................................................... 69 17. Forest Resources. ................................................................................................ 72 B. Potentially Significant Impacts Which Can Be Mitigated Below a Level of Significance and Mitigation Measures.................................................................... 74 1. Biological Resources. .......................................................................................... 74 2. Cultural Resources............................................................................................ 105 3. Geology and Soils.............................................................................................. 110 4. Hazards and Hazardous Materials.................................................................. 113 5. Land Use and Planning. ................................................................................... 125 6. Public Services................................................................................................... 126 7. Traffic and Circulation..................................................................................... 129 8. Utilities and Service Systems............................................................................ 131 9. Forest Resources. .............................................................................................. 136 C. Impacts Analyzed in the EIR and Determined to be Significant and Unavoidable............................................................................................................. 138 1. Air Quality......................................................................................................... 138 2. Noise. .................................................................................................................. 146 3. Traffic................................................................................................................. 148 i M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 771 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. ............................................................................. 150 D. Additional Topics Required by CEQA. ................................................................ 156 1. Significant Irreversible Environmental Effects. ............................................ 156 2. Growth Inducing Impacts................................................................................ 157 E. Project Alternatives. ............................................................................................... 159 1. No Project/No Development Alternative. ....................................................... 159 2. No Project/Existing County General Plan Alternative.................................. 161 3. Alternative Site Plan......................................................................................... 164 4. Reduced Daily Grading Alternative................................................................ 166 5. Environmentally Superior Alternative. .......................................................... 167 F. Statement of Overriding Considerations.............................................................. 168 1. Findings Related to Traffic and Transportation Impacts............................. 170 2. Findings Related to Air Quality Impacts........................................................ 171 3. Findings Related to Noise Impacts. ................................................................. 172 4. Findings Related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions............................................ 172 V. APPROVING THE PROJECT ....................................................................................... 174 VI. REGARDING STAFF DIRECTION.............................................................................. 174 VII. REGARDING CONTENTS AND CUSTODIAN OF RECORD ................................. 174 ii M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 772 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations CANDIDATE FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS FROM APPROVAL OF LAFCO 3188A, REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT ZONE FP-5 SAN BERNARDINO, AND DETACHMENT FROM COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70 (SPRING TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN) I.INTRODUCTION The San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO or Commission), in approving LAFCO 3188A for a Reorganization to include Annexation to the City of San Bernardino (“City”) and to the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District Zone FP-5 San Bernardino, and Detachment from County Service Area 70 (Spring Trails Specific Plan), makes the findings described below and adopts the statement of overriding considerations presented at the end of these findings. The total area encompassed within the proposed Sphere expansion is estimated to be 350 acres. The Commission makes the Findings described below in connection with the City’s approval of the Spring Trails Specific Plan (“Project” or “Spring Trails”). The current Project proposes development of 215 single-family lots, in addition to a single existing residence, within a 350-acre site situated within an unincorporated area of the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains. The Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) was prepared by the City acting as lead agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). In considering LAFCO 3188A, the Commission will be acting as a CEQA Responsible Agency. Hereafter, the Notice of Preparation, Notice of Availability, Draft EIR, Technical Studies, Final EIR containing Responses to Comments and textual revisions to the Draft EIR, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program will be referred to collectively herein as the “EIR” unless otherwise specified. These Findings are based on the entire record before the Commission, including the EIR. The Commission adopts the facts and analyses in the EIR, which are summarized below for convenience. The omission of some detail or aspect of the EIR does not mean that it has been rejected by the Commission. I.PROJECT SUMMARY A. Site Location. The Project is located within unincorporated San Bernardino County on the northern edge of the City of San Bernardino and in the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains. The site is approximately 1.5 miles east of the unincorporated community of Devore and the junction of Interstate 215 (I-215) and I-15. The Project is bounded by the San Bernardino National Forest on three sides, and the Verdemont community of unincorporated San Bernardino County on the southern side. The Project is approximately one-third mile northwest of the intersection of 1 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 773 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Meyers Road and Little League Drive. Primary access is from a new roadway extending from Little League Drive, and secondary access will be provided by a new road extending south and connecting to the frontage road along I-215. Freeway access is from the Palm Avenue interchange and the Glen Helen Parkway/Devore Road interchange. B.Project Description. The Project site (349.36 acres, or approximately 350 acres) is within the City of San Bernardino’s unincorporated sphere of influence (“SOI”) and will be annexed into the City. LAFCO 3188A consists of a request by the City of San Bernardino (City) for a Reorganization to include Annexation to the City and to the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District Zone FP-5 San Bernardino, and Detachment from County Service Area 70 (Spring Trails Specific Plan). There has been one major change in the project that would substantially reduce all impacts of the proposed project relative to the forecast in the EIR. The original project would have resulted in 242 acres of development and 111 acres of open space. The total number of residential units approved by the City was 307. Due to additional geology and soil data obtained subsequent to the EIR’s certification, the project design was revised. The current design will allow about 199 acres to be developed and an estimated 154 acres will be retained in open space and other non-residential uses. The total number of residential units now proposed is 215. This substantial reduction in the number of units, plus positive changes in air emission reductions and overall project footprint provide assurance that the project that would be allowed to proceed after Reorganization will have less overall impact than the originally approved project. Under the current “Preferred Development Plan”, the Spring Trails Specific Plan will accommodate 215 single-family detached units, set among neighborhoods separated by open space corridors, drainage ways, roadways, and sloped areas. A system of pathways will connect the residences with neighborhood parks and natural open spaces. Development will be focused onto approximately 199 acres, or about 56 percent of the total site, and will include 154 acres of open space, parks and internal slopes and fuel modification zones. The Preferred Development Plan assumes that the Southern California Edison (“SCE”) overhead electric lines that traverse the western portion of the Project site would remain above- ground. Underneath the central portion of the electric line easement, the land use is designated as Open Space-Controlled. The northern portion of the electric line easement is designated as residential; however, development is not permitted within the electric line easement. The average lot size in Spring Trails is 29,000 square feet. The largest lots are on the northern portion and upper elevations of the site, and the largest lot measures 18.3 acres. The smallest lots are on the lower elevations and southern portion of the project, and the smallest lot measures 10,801 square feet. In many instances the legal lots extend beyond the buildable area and include graded slopes, fuel modification zones, steep slopes, and open spaces. Approximately 199 acres of the total site would be improved for the onsite development of residential lots, roadways, trails, detention basins, fuel modification zones, and parks. An additional 23.7 acres would be graded and improved for offsite access, including 4.2 acres for the primary access road and 19.5 acres for the secondary access road. Alternative (Underground Electric Lines) Development Plan 2 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 774 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations In the event that it becomes feasible or necessary to do so, an “Alternative Development Plan” is proposed, which is identical to the Preferred Development Plan in every respect, except for the electric lines would be relocated underground. The Alternative Development Plan contains 215 single-family detached units. Access Roads and Circulation Primary access to Spring Trails would be provided by a new road extending from the southeastern corner of the site and connecting to Little League Drive. Secondary access is planned via a new road extending from the southwestern corner of the site to the frontage road along I-215. Except for emergency access, the intersection of the secondary access road with Meyers Road is designed with barriers to prevent vehicular access onto Meyers Road. Circulation within Spring Trails will be provided by a loop road and a series of cul-de-sacs. Necessary public streets, both on- and off-site, would be improved by the developer and dedicated to the City. All roadways would be two-way travel—one lane in each direction—with varying treatments for parkways, sidewalks, and parking. The roadway types are:  Primary Access Road (50 ft. Right-of-Way (ROW)) would provide the main access for residents and guests to enter and leave Spring Trails;  Secondary Access Roadway (50 ft. ROW) is intended as an alternative street for local traffic to access arterial streets outside the project site. General public would not be able to access Meyers Road from the Secondary Access Road through the use of a barrier. Emergency vehicles would only be allowed to access Meyers Road from the Secondary Access Road.  Primary Local Street (50 ft. ROW) would provide primary internal access within Spring Trails.  Secondary Local Road (40 ft. ROW) would provide resident access in the northern portion of the project and include parallel parking on one side of the street.  Cul-de-Sac I (46 ft. ROW) would connect to the local streets and provide access to homes on both sides of the street.  Cul-de-Sac II (40 ft. ROW) would connect to the local streets and provide access to homes on only one side of the street. Trails and Open Space A total of 154 acres of the 350-acre site is planned as open space, including natural open space, controlled open space, and parks. Two neighborhood parks would be public, serve the dual function as detention basins, and include shade structures and tot lots. One private park is proposed to include a thematic garden, observation point, a tot lot, and other amenities such as an 3 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 775 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations outdoor fireplace, water feature, picnic benches, and gazebo. A private, enclosed dog park is also proposed. Under the Preferred Development Plan with overhead electric lines, 126 acres is planned as open space, with an additional 0.9 acres of open space to accommodate the SCE easement for the overhead electric lines. The land underneath the central portion of the SCE easement is designated as Open Space-Controlled. If permitted by SCE, a park and/or trail may be located under this portion of the electric lines as a permitted use; however, they are not assumed in the buildout of the Preferred Development Plan. A diverse system of interconnected trails would include a community trail (8-foot-wide trail within street ROW) for pedestrian and bicycle use; equestrian/pedestrian trail (12-foot-wide trail surfaced with decomposed granite or similar surface and connecting with existing offsite trail); and 4-foot-wide hiking trails. Storm Drainage There are four major drainage areas within the Spring Trails Project site. Upon development, some natural drainage courses onsite would be maintained, and some on- and off-site flows would be captured and routed through a series of catch basin inlets and storm drain systems. Captured stormwater would be conveyed to three onsite detention basins where it would be treated and discharged at a controlled rate into Cable Canyon. The drainage plan has been designed to ensure conveyance of the 100-year storm. Best Management Practices (“BMPs”) for water quality treatment would include the extended detention basins and media filtration devices. These improvements would be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of San Bernardino and the San Bernardino County Flood Control District standards. Water Supply System The City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department would provide water service to Spring Trails, and currently provides service to pressure zones ranging from 1,249 feet to 2,100 feet. The nearest existing reservoir is the Meyers Canyon Reservoir, which is within the 2,100- foot pressure zone, but is not adequate for buildout of Spring Trails or Verdemont. Therefore, water would be supplied to Spring Trails from lower elevations by a combination of expanding and improving the offsite water system and the provision of onsite reservoirs and transmission lines. Offsite improvements would include the creation/improvement of a series of pump stations and transmission lines within the Verdemont community. In addition, three onsite reservoirs are proposed to meet the need for 2,300-, 2,500-, 2,700-, and 3,000-foot elevation pressure zones. Based upon the projected buildout of Spring Trails, total projected water demands are:  Average Daily Demand – 328 gallons per minute (gpm), reduced by about 30% due to current number of units  Maximum Daily Demand – 568 gpm, reduced by about 30% due to current number of units  Maximum Peak Hour Demand – 1,136 gpm, reduced by about 30% due to current number of units 4 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 776 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The water facilities for Spring Trails have been sized to meet maximum demand in addition to fire flow requirements. Fire flow capacity is designed to provide 1,500 gpm for four hours. Pumping stations would be designed with 100 percent redundancy in the event that one or more of the pumping units fails, and would be equipped with onsite generators that can operate in a blackout or emergency condition. The pipelines that connect pump stations to the reservoirs would be a maximum of 20 inches in diameter. All looping lines would be 12 inches in diameter, and other distribution pipelines would be 8 inches in diameter. Sewer Collection The City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department would provide wastewater service to the Spring Trails Project, which lies within its sanitary sewer service area. Spring Trails would connect to the City’s existing 10-inch sewer line, which ends at Little League Drive and Meyers Road, then connects to the south to a major interceptor system, and is eventually treated in the San Bernardino Water Reclamation Plant. Existing capacity is available in the sewer system to serve the buildout population within the City. The sewer facilities would be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department standards and specifications and in accordance with the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (latest edition). The sewer mains would be located in public street rights-of- way where possible. If not, they would be constructed within dedicated public utility easements. The sewer system would be dedicated to and maintained by the City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Department. Fuel Modification and Fire Protection The entire Project site is within a Very High Hazard Severity Zone as designated by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (“CAL FIRE”). Once annexed to the City of San Bernardino, the Project site would also be subject to the City’s Development Code and established Foothill Fire Zones Overlay District (Development Code Chapter 19.15). The overlay district designates three zones within the wildland interface:  Fire Zone A (Extreme hazard), characterized by slopes over 30 percent  Fire Zone B (High Hazard), characterized by slopes 15–30 percent  Fire Zone C (Moderate Hazard), characterized by slopes less than 15 percent The Project site has approximately 121 acres in Fire Zone A, 112 acres in Fire Zone B, and 119 acres in Fire Zone C. The Overlay District specifies development standards relating to access and circulation, site and street identification, roadside vegetation, water supply, erosion control, construction and development design, and miscellaneous items. The entire Project site is already within the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District and its Valley Service Zone, which is the fire service provider for the City. Any remaining references to the City Fire Department in this document should instead reference the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District. 5 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 777 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations One of the components of the wildland fire defense systems for Spring Trails would be the implementation of fuel modification zones. The proposed plan includes the following defined fuel modification zones:  Fuel Modification Zone A (flat) - Noncombustible Construction: 20- to 35-foot setback zone for noncombustible construction only. Fuel Modification Zone A shall be maintained by the homeowner or the HOA. At no time would the Fuel Modification Zone A be less than 20 feet.  Fuel Modification Zone B - Wet Zone (100 percent removal of undesirable plant species): First 50 to 200 feet from Fuel Modification Zone A. Fuel Modification Zone B shall be permanently irrigated, fully landscaped with approved drought-tolerant, deep-rooted, moisture-retentive material as container shrub material, or hydroseeded per SBFD Approved Plant List. Fuel Modification Zone B area shall be maintained by the homeowner, HOA, or landscape maintenance district (“LMD”) as appropriate.  Fuel Modification Zone C - Dry Zone (50 percent thinning of the acceptable existing plant material): 40 to 185 feet. Fuel Modification Zone C shall be a non-irrigated area. Removal of all flammable undesirable species. Specimen and trees shall be retained as directed by the owner's representative but must be thinned a minimum of 50 percent, including removal of all low hanging foliage within three times the height of the understory shrubs or 10 feet, whichever is greater, along with dead or broken branches. All accumulated plant debris on the ground shall be removed. Fuel Modification Zone C area shall be maintained by the LMD. This Project does not contain any 30 percent thinning “D” fuel modification zones. General Project Phasing and Schedule It is anticipated in the DEIR that the Project will be phased, with complete buildout anticipated to occur within approximately three years of the start of construction. This phasing, however, is based on a judgment of future planning and market factors, and therefore is subject to change. The Project, however, would be developed in the following sequence: Phase 1 (approximately one year)  Offsite grading and improvement of the primary and secondary access roads;  Offsite backbone utilities (water, sewer, drainage, etc.);  Onsite backbone utilities;  Rough grading of Spring Trails Project site (approximately 200 acres) for development of residential lots, roadways, trails, detention basins, and parks; and  Detention basins improved. 6 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 778 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Phase 2 (approximately 2.5 years)  Residential development would sequence from the south and continue northward. Infrastructure, roadways, fuel modification zones, parks, and landscaping necessary to serve residential development would be phased accordingly;  Improvements in this phase would generally follow the sequence of water improvements, which are divided into three pressure zones;  Sewer, storm drain, dry utilities, and roadway paving would be sequenced with improvements in each water pressure zone;  Trails, parks, and common area landscaping in each pressure zone would occur prior to or concurrent with issuance of residential building permits for that pressure zone; and  Fuel modification zones necessary to support the development in each zone would occur as noted in the Fire Protection Plan. In accordance with Section 8.54.070 of the City of San Bernardino’s Municipal Code, construction would be limited to the hours between 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM. Estimated Earthwork Based on preliminary estimates, the earthwork for the Project site itself is anticipated to balance. The primary and secondary access roads, however, would require substantial cut, and the net export requirement for the Project is 251,000 cubic yards (cy). Based on an estimated 14 cy capacity per haul truck, an estimated 17,929 truck trips would be required to export soil to complete the access roads. This is estimated to occur over an approximately three-month period, and therefore, based on a six-day week, would require approximately 249 truck trips per day. Development Agreement A Development Agreement was proposed as part of the Project approvals. The Development Agreement includes certain Project conditions that benefit the Project, as well as local and regional benefits. These conditions include:  Dedication to the City of San Bernardino right-of-way for water main lines and related facilities, easements for the construction and operation of water tank sites, and right-of- way for sewer main lines and related facilities;  Construction of water lines and related facilities including water tanks within the easement shown in the Tract Map for the Project site and dedication of those facilities to the City; and  Construction of sewer main lines and related facilities within the easements shown in the Tract Map and dedication of those facilities to the City. In exchange, the Development Agreement provides for vested development rights for the Project and reimbursement of those costs that exceed the fair share of the Project for the improvements. 7 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 779 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations C.Actions Covered by the EIR The following requested discretionary actions are necessary to allow for implementation of the Project:  City of San Bernardino Mayor and Common Council: o Approve General Plan Amendment (GPA-02-09), including pre-annexation of the Project site; o Approve Development Code Amendment (DCA 12-10) to add the Spring Trails Specific Plan to the list of Special Purpose Districts in the Development Code; o Zone the annexed site as Specific Plan (consistent with existing pre-zoning) and the 26.4-acre adjacent area as Residential Estate (up to 1 du/acre); o Adopt Spring Trails Specific Plan; o Approve Tentative Tract Map (TTM 15576); o Approve Development Agreement; o Approve Project-specific Water Quality Management Plan; o Issue Grading Permits and Building Permits; o A Development Permit will be required for the design of the single-family units. As a side note, the Hillside Management Overlay zone set forth in Chapter 19.17 of the City of San Bernardino Municipal Code does not apply in this matter as the Specific Plan sets forth a fire protection plan that is in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code. Thus, the Conditional Use Permit called for in Section 19.17.050 of the Development Code is not required prior to construction. Instead, a Development Permit is required prior to construction to evaluate the project design against the Specific Plan and other regulations, and to ensure consistency with the Fire Protection Plan.  Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”): o Approve LAFCO 3188A for a Reorganization to include Annexation to the City and to the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District Zone FP-5 San Bernardino, and Detachment from County Service Area 70 (Spring Trails Specific Plan).  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: o Issuance of a Section 404 permit under the federal Clean Water Act. 8 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 780 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations  Regional Water Control Board: o Water Quality Certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act;  National Pollution Discharge Eliminations System permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Streambed Alteration Agreement  California Public Utilities Commission/Southern California Edison o Review of the Project with regard to the SCE transmission line easement and maintenance right-of-way through the Project site. D.Project Objectives The Project objectives are as follows: 1. Develop a high-quality, low-density residential community that optimizes the unique characteristics of the project site, including maximizing view opportunities. 2. Assure adequate roadway access to the development while preserving the integrity of surrounding communities. 3. Enhance City trail facilities by expanding the system and integrating project-site trails with existing and proposed hiking, equestrian, and bicycle trails within the surrounding community. 4. Comply with policies for land use development within and adjacent to the San Bernardino National Forest. 5. Minimize the development footprint and maximize available open space areas. 6. Design a safe community cognizant of natural conditions, including wildland fires, flooding, and seismic hazards. 7. Minimize environmental impacts associated with construction of improvements and long- term operation of the new community. 8. Create an attractive, viable project, and realize a reasonable return on investment. The Commission concurs with the preceding project description which includes revisions to the Project since it was approved in 2013. 9 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 781 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations II.ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The City conducted an extensive review of this Project which included a Draft EIR and a Final EIR, including technical reports; along with a public review and comment period. The following is a summary of the City’s environmental review of this Project:  On November 24, 2009, the City circulated an Initial Study (“IS”) and Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) identifying the environmental issues to be analyzed in the Project’s EIR to the State Clearinghouse, responsible agencies, and other interested parties. The NOP (Appendix A to the Draft EIR) identified potential environmental impacts related to: Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation/Traffic, Utilities and Service Systems, and was the basis for the determination that an EIR should be prepared for the Project.  The NOP public review period was 30 days. The City accepted a number of written comments from various State, regional and local agencies. The City considered these comments when determining the final scope of the EIR’s analysis. The scope of the issues identified in the comments related to each of the impact areas which are analyzed within the EIR, as listed above, with several comments concentrated on fire hazards.  The Draft EIR was distributed for public review and the City filed a Notice of Availability (“NOA”) with the State Clearinghouse on July 29, 2011, commencing the 45-day review period.  The City received a total of 12 comment letters from public agencies and 41comment letters from residents. The City prepared specific responses to all comments. The responses to comments are included in the Final EIR.  Notice of the Common Council hearing to consider the Project was provided in the following newspapers of general and/or regional circulation: the San Bernardino Sun on February 8, 2013.  On February 19, 2013, the Common Council held a public hearing to consider the Project and staff recommendations. The Common Council, after considering written comments and public testimony on the EIR, determined that no new information was presented that would require recirculation of the EIR. Following public testimony, submission of additional written comments, and staff recommendations, the Common Council voted to certify the EIR, adopt these Findings, and approve the Project, including: Certification of the Environmental Impact Report; approval of General Plan Amendment (GPA-02-09); approval of the zoning designation for the Project site of Specific Plan; approval of the Spring Trails Specific Plan; approval of Tentative Tract Map (TTM 15576); approval of 10 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 782 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the Development Agreement; and approval of the Project-specific Water Quality Management Plan. The Commission has reviewed the Environmental Review and Public Participation summary and concurs that it is an accurate record of the review and participation events conducted by the City. The Commission was afforded an opportunity to participate in this review process as a CEQA Responsible Agency and is using the certified Final EIR for the LAFCO 3188A CEQA compliance process. III.INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT FINDING The City selected and retained the Planning Center as the environmental consultant to prepare the EIR. The Planning Center prepared the EIR under the supervision and direction of the City’s planning staff. Finding:The EIR for the Project reflected the City’s independent judgment and in reviewing the Final EIR as a CEQA Responsible Agency, the Commission concurs with the findings and conclusions presented below. The Commission has exercised independent judgment regarding the EIR as a CEQA Responsible Agency in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c)(3). A.General Finding On Mitigation Measures In preparing the Conditions of Approval for this Project, City staff incorporated the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR as applicable to the Project. In the event that the Conditions of Approval do not use the exact wording of the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR, in each such instance, the adopted Conditions of Approval are intended to be identical or substantially similar to the recommended mitigation measure. Any minor revisions were made for the purpose of improving clarity or to better define the intended purpose by the City. Finding:Unless specifically stated to the contrary in these findings, it is the City’s intent to adopt all mitigation measures recommended by the Draft EIR which are applicable to the Project. If a measure has, through error, been omitted from the Conditions of Approval or from these Findings, and that measure is not specifically reflected in these Findings, that measure shall be deemed to be adopted pursuant to this paragraph. In addition, unless specifically stated to the contrary in these Findings, all Conditions of Approval repeating or rewording mitigation measures recommended in the EIR are intended to be substantially similar to the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR and are found to be equally effective in avoiding or lessening the identified environmental impact. In each instance, the Conditions of Approval contain the final wording for the mitigation measures. The Commission understands this General Finding and concurs with reliance on the Conditions of Approval as the final wording for EIR mitigation measures. Note that the Commission has no responsibility for implementing any project-related mitigation measures. 11 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 783 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations IV.ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS City staff reports, the EIR, written and oral testimony at public meetings or hearings, these Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and other information in the administrative record, serve as the basis for the Commission’s environmental determination. The detailed analysis of potentially significant environmental impacts and proposed mitigation measures for the Project is presented in Section 5 of the Draft EIR. Responses to comments from the public and from other government agencies on the Draft EIR are provided in Section 2 of the Final EIR. The EIR evaluated seventeen (17) major environmental categories for potential impacts including: Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation/Traffic, Utilities and Service Systems, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Forest Resources. Both Project-specific and cumulative impacts were evaluated. Of these 17 major environmental categories, the Commission concurs with the conclusions in the EIR that the issues and sub-issues discussed in Sections A and B below either are less than significant without mitigation, or can be mitigated to a less than significant level. Unless otherwise indicated, the analysis of each of the impact areas contained in Sections A and B herein is applicable to both the Preferred Development Plan and the Alternative (Underground Electric Lines) Development Plan. A.Impacts Identified as Less Than Significant Requiring No Mitigation. The following issues were found in the EIR as having no potential to cause significant impacts, and therefore require no Project-specific mitigation. In the presentation below, each resource issue is identified and the potential for significant adverse environmental effects is discussed. 1.Aesthetics. a. Substantial Adverse Effect on a Scenic Vista. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project would have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Finding:Impacts related to Aesthetics are discussed in detail at Section 5.1 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the potential for the Project to have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista is less than significant, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: According to the California Scenic Highway Mapping System of the California Department of Transportation, the Project site is not on or near a major state-designated scenic 12 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 784 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations highway. (EIR at 5.1-4). Goal OS 5, Policy OS 5.3, of the County of San Bernardino General Plan designates I-15 from the junction with I-215 northeast to the Nevada state line, excepting all incorporated areas, as a County Scenic Route. The Project site is not visible when traveling northbound on the I-15. (Id.). Changes to the landscape would occur during mass grading, completion of the first phases of home construction, and at full buildout. (EIR at 5.1-14). Onsite grading and home construction would be most visible from commercial properties and to north- and southbound travelers along I-215 between Palm Avenue and Glen Helen Parkway. (Id.). The EIR contains simulated photographs to demonstrate how the site may look during site grading, during the first phase of home construction and after Project completion while traveling north on I-215 at the Palm Avenue off-ramp; as well as how the Project site may appear during the initial grading phase, during the first phase of Project housing construction and after Project completion from prominent views from the southwest at Glen Helen Parkway and the railroad tracks south of Cajon Boulevard. (See EIR Figures 5.1-3 to 5.1-8). The simulated photographs contained in the EIR demonstrate how the view toward the site from the east- southeast would be virtually unchanged after Project completion. (EIR at 5.1-15). The view of the Project site from the east-southeast is blocked by the hilly terrain. (EIR Figure 5.1-9). Mass grading and single-family homes without landscaping would be plainly visible from these vantage points. However, due to the residential units’ low scale, especially in comparison to steep hillsides, they would not interfere with the dominant view and backdrop of the San Bernardino Mountains. The project would not be out of scale with the existing viewshed and would not dominate the landscape. Rooflines would not encroach into the skyline or the dominant ridgelines. (EIR at 5.1-15). Due to the Project’s low density, the Specific Plan’s design guidelines and design concepts, the large amount of open space preservation, and proposed landscaping, the homes would not dominate the views. (Id.). Since the Project site contains slopes with a 15 percent or greater grade, the development guidelines of the HMOD would be followed, and have been incorporated into the Specific Plan Development Standards. The majority (76 percent) of the Project site on slopes of 15 percent or greater grade would be preserved as open space, and the remaining acres would 13 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 785 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations follow HMOD development standards. (Id.). In the Preferred Development Scenario, the SCE electric lines would be visible from areas adjacent to the Project site, as they currently are. (Id.). For these reasons, the potential for the Project to have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista is less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b. Potential Significant Impact: Scenic Resources. Whether the Project would substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. Finding:Impacts related to Aesthetics are discussed in detail at Section 5.1 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the potential for the Project to substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway is less than significant, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The County of San Bernardino General Plan designates I- 15 as a County Scenic Route, from the junction with I-215 northeast to the Nevada state line, excepting all incorporated areas. Due to area topography, the freeway interchange elevation, and speed of travel, the Project site is not visible to motorists once they pass the I-215 interchange and head northbound on the I-15. (EIR at 5.1- 15). The interchange itself is approximately one mile long. Motorists traveling northbound at 65 miles per hour would be on the interchange for less than a minute, and may have a view of the Project site looking east for a few seconds before the Project site is behind them. (Id.). Traveling southbound on the I-15, motorists do not see the northern portion of the Project site due to prominent ridgelines, nor do they see the southern portion of the Project site from the I-215 junction, because road contours and the northbound lanes of the I-15 and I-215 interchange and associated traffic interfere with views. (Id.). The Project site is only visible from the northbound I-15 before the I-215 junction. This portion of I-15 is not designated a scenic highway. In the Preferred Development Scenario, the SCE electric lines would be visible from areas adjacent to the project site, as they currently are. (Id.). For these reasons, the potential for the Project to substantially damage scenic resources is less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 14 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 786 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations c. Potential Significant Impact: Degradation of Visual Character. Whether the Project would substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Finding:Impacts related to Aesthetics are discussed in detail at Section 5.1 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the potential for the Project to substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings is less than significant, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Implementation of the Project would alter existing landform and involve substantial grading. The visual character of the majority of the Project site would be changed from undeveloped open space to a low-density residential development. (EIR at 5.1-14). The development footprint encompasses approximately 241.5 acres, or 68 percent of the total site, and includes areas for the onsite development of residential lots, roadways, trails, detention basins, fuel modification zones, and parks. Approximately 193.0 acres of the total site would be graded and improved. (Id.). An additional 23.7 acres would be graded and improved for offsite access, including 4.2 acres for the primary access road and 19.5 acres for the secondary access road. The Project is designed to preserve significant watersheds, severely sloped areas, and seismic hazard areas and incorporate them into the land plan as open space. The Project’s design accounts for the potential impacts of the hazards posed by seismic activity, flooding, and wildland fires. (Id.). The EIR contains simulated photographs to demonstrate how the site may look during site grading, during the first phase of home construction and after Project completion while traveling north on I-215 at the Palm Avenue off- ramp; as well as how the Project site may appear during the initial grading phase, during the first phase of Project housing construction and after Project completion from prominent views from the southwest at Glen Helen Parkway and the railroad tracks south of Cajon Boulevard. (See EIR Figures 5.1-3 to 5.1-8). The simulated photographs contained in the EIR demonstrate how the view toward the site from the east- southeast would be virtually unchanged after Project 15 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 787 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations completion. (EIR at 5.1-15). The view of the Project site from the east-southeast is blocked by the hilly terrain. (EIR Figure 5.1-9). Mass grading and single-family homes without landscaping would be plainly visible from these vantage points. However, due to the residential units’ low scale, especially in comparison to steep hillsides, they would not interfere with the dominant view and backdrop of the San Bernardino Mountains. The Project would not be out of scale with the existing viewshed and would not dominate the landscape. Rooflines would not encroach into the skyline or the dominant ridgelines. (EIR at 5.1-15). Due to the Project’s low density, the Specific Plan’s design guidelines and design concepts, the large amount of open space preservation, and proposed landscaping, the homes would not dominate the views. Since the Project site contains slopes with a 15 percent or greater grade, the development guidelines of the HMOD would be followed, and have been incorporated into the Specific Plan Development Standards. The majority (76 percent) of the Project site on slopes of 15 percent or greater grade would be preserved as open space, and the remaining acres would follow HMOD development standards. (Id.). For these reasons, the potential for the Project to substantially degrade the visual character of the Project site or its surroundings is less than significant, and no mitigation is required. d. Potential Significant Impact: Light and Glare. Whether the Project would create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Finding:Impacts related to Aesthetics are discussed in detail at Section 5.1 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the potential for the Project to create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area is less than significant, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Additional lighting would be required to provide nighttime street, trail, and building illumination for the Project. Other sources of light include security lighting, nighttime traffic, and light associated with the nighttime use of the residences. In addition to the adjacent residential land uses, other light-sensitive land uses include the California State University at San Bernardino (CSUSB) observatory, 16 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 788 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations currently being constructed on Little Badger Hill on the CSUSB campus, between three and four miles east of the Project site. (EIR at 5.1-15). Nighttime lighting has the potential to create light pollution, which occurs when lighting is directed upward and gets scattered by the atmosphere. To observatories, this light competes with starlight and interferes with the ability to see the night sky clearly. Observatories require atmospheric darkness so that the night sky can be viewed clearly. (EIR at 5.1-16). The use of lighting within the Spring Trails Project would be consistent with the dark sky guidelines suggested by the International Dark Sky Association (www.darksky.org) and with the City of San Bernardino Development Code. (EIR at 5.1-11). A detailed lighting plan, including specifications and design standards, would be submitted as part of the construction documents. (Id.). Pursuant to Section 19.20.03.014 of the City’s Development Code and the design criteria in the Spring Trails Specific Plan, lights associated with the Project development would be shielded and directed toward the interior of the site. (EIR at 5.1-1; 5.1-12). Exterior lighting would be designed, arranged, directed, or shielded in such a manner as to contain direct illumination onsite, thereby preventing excess illumination and light spillover onto adjoining land uses and/or roadways and without adversely affecting day or nighttime views in the project area. (EIR at 5.1-16). Lighting would be installed to accommodate safety and security, while minimizing impacts on surrounding residential areas and the CSUSB observatory. (Id.). For these reasons, the potential for the Project to create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area is less than significant, and no mitigation is required. e. Potential Significant Impact: Cumulative Impacts. Whether the Project would result in cumulatively significant visual/aesthetic impacts. Finding:Impacts related to Aesthetics are discussed in detail at Section 5.1 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the potential for the Project to result in cumulatively significant visual/aesthetic impacts is less than significant, and therefore, no mitigation is required. 17 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 789 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Finding: The adjacent developed communities and undeveloped parcels to the south and southwest are designated Residential Estate (RE) in the City of San Bernardino’s General Plan. (EIR at 5.1-16). Continued conversion of rural and undeveloped lands to low-density residential suburban land uses would change the aesthetic character of the area. The adjacent 26.4-acre area consists of six rural residential parcels, four of which are occupied with residences and related structures. Access to four of the parcels is from Meyers Road, with the remaining two obtaining access from Martin Ranch Road prior to entering the Project site. There is currently no planned development for this adjacent area. (EIR at 5.1-3). This Project would incrementally contribute to both direct and indirect light and glare affecting the nighttime aesthetic character of the region. The entire Project site is currently prezoned by the City of San Bernardino as RE. In the context of the City’s General Plan, the Verdemont area is residential in nature. The Project’s features and detailed design criteria per the Specific Plan and the HMOD meet the City’s goal to provide a variety of housing stock, including upscale homes. The Project clusters development to maintain undeveloped open space on approximately 30 percent of the site. (EIR at 5.1-16). Eventually, as residential development occurs in the remaining undeveloped areas south and southwest of the Project site, the character of the Verdemont area would be changed into a more suburban community, as intended by the General Plan. By maintaining open space and preserving the dominant view and backdrop of the San Bernardino Mountains, the Project would protect the natural components that contribute to the scenic value of the area, including existing terrain, vegetation, and major ridgelines. (Id.). For these reasons, the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts related to aesthetics will be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 2.Air Quality. a. Violate Air Quality Standard-Operations. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project’s long-term operations will violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. 18 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 790 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding:Potential impacts of the Project on Air Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.2 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project’s long-term operations will not violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation during operations, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Project-related vehicle trips were obtained from the Project-specific traffic impact analysis. (EIR Appendix K). Based on the trip generation rate in the traffic study, the Project would generate a total of 3,149 average daily trips (“ADT”) at project buildout. (EIR at 5.2-16). Air pollutant emissions modeling is based on mobile- and stationary- source emissions for each of the land uses. Based on computer modeling, the Project would result in an increase of air pollutant emissions for both mobile and stationary sources. However, Project-related emissions would not exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (“SCAQMD”) regional emissions thresholds for the analyzed pollutants. (EIR Table 5.2-8). Therefore, the Project would not cumulatively contribute to the O3, PM10, and PM2.5 nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin. Consequently, the proposed Project’s operational air quality impact is considered less than significant. (EIR at 5.2-16). Therefore, because long-term operations of the Project will not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation; impacts are considered to be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b.Exposure of Sensitive Receptors-Operations. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project’s long-term operations will expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Finding:Potential impacts of the Project on Air Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.2 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that long-term Project operations will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Carbon monoxide (CO) hot spots are typically produced at intersections, where traffic congestion is highest because vehicles queue and are subject to reduced speeds. Typically, for an intersection to exhibit a significant CO concentration, it would operate at level of service (“LOS”) E or worse. Based on the traffic impact analysis prepared for the Project (EIR Appendix K), under future year With 19 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 791 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Project conditions, the following intersections are projected to operate at LOS E or worse before traffic improvements: o Palm Avenue at I-215 freeway NB ramps (LOS E during AM peak hour and LOS F during PM peak hours for Year 2013); and o Palm Avenue at I-215 freeway SB ramps (LOS F during AM peak hour for Year 2013). (EIR at 5.2- 25). Intersections listed above for 2013 are most conducive to the formation of CO hot spots and were modeled during the worst-case peak hour of congestion. Because technological improvements in later-model cars have made significant emissions reductions in CO, background CO concentrations in the South Coast Air Basin and vehicle emissions would be lower in 2030 than in the Project buildout year, Year 2030 conditions were not modeled. Project-related traffic would not exceed any of the state one- or eight-hour CO ambient air quality standards (“AAQS”) at the study area intersections at buildout year plus cumulative growth conditions. (EIR Table 5.2-11). Consequently, sensitive receptors in the area would not be significantly affected by CO emissions generated by operation of the proposed Project, and localized air quality impacts related to mobile- source emissions would therefore be less than significant. To estimate concentrations of air pollutants generated from operation of the Project at nearby existing and proposed sensitive receptors, the Project’s maximum daily operational emissions were compared to the operational localized significance thresholds (LSTs). In accordance with SCAQMD methodology, only onsite stationary sources were included in the analysis. Project-related vehicles traveling on- and offsite are not included in the analysis. (EIR 5.2-26). Project emissions would not exceed the LST screening level criteria for CO, NO , PM , or210 PM2.5, and therefore operation of the Project would not expose offsite and onsite sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. (EIR Table 5.2-12). Therefore, on a localized level, the Project’s potential to result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations during long-term Project operations is less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 20 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 792 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations c. Potential Significant Impact: Cumulative Impacts-Operations. Whether the Project will result in cumulatively significant operational air quality impacts. Finding:Potential impacts of the Project on Air Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.2 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the potential for the Project to result in cumulatively significant operational air quality impacts is less than significant, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: With respect to operational air quality emissions, any project that does not exceed or can be mitigated to less than the daily regional threshold values is not considered by the SCAQMD to be a substantial source of air pollution and does not add significantly to a cumulative impact. (EIR at 5.2-27). Operation of the Project would not result in emissions in excess of the SCAQMD regional emissions thresholds for long-term operation for VOC, NOx, CO, PM , and PM . (Id.). Therefore, the Project’s contribution102.5 to cumulative operational air quality impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 3.Biological Resources. a. Cumulative Impacts. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project will result in cumulatively significant impacts to Biological Resources. Finding:Impacts related to Biological Resources are discussed in detail in Section 5.3 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the potential for the Project to result in cumulatively significant impacts to Biological Resources is less than significant, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Spring Trails Project site contains a number of unique and uncommon characteristics that provide for a wide diversity of plant and animal species, especially within the onsite riparian areas. (EIR at 5.3-59). However, specific aspects of the Project’s design, as well as the implementation of the required mitigation measures would successfully avoid or mitigate significant impacts to these resources. (Id.). The most significant area of riparian habitat on the Project site is Cable Creek, and that area is outside of the Project footprint and would not be impacted by the Project. Additional Project design features and 21 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 793 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations required mitigation would conserve and/or enhance existing onsite riparian features and wildlife corridors. (Id.). Mitigation is also recommended that would require additional offsite conservation of riparian areas and other important habitats. While continued development within the greater San Bernardino region has decreased the amount of available high-quality habitat in the area, this Project does not cumulatively contribute to that decrease. (Id.). The most important habitat values are maintained on the site, and certain aspects of the Project’s design, such as the permanent preservation of Cable Creek, actually provide long-term benefits to the region in terms of biological resource conservation. Based on each of these factors, it can be determined that the Project would not present a significant cumulative impact to biological resources. (Id.). Therefore, cumulative impacts to biological resources will be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 4.Cultural Resources. a. Potential Significant Impact: Historic Resources. Whether the Project would cause a substantial change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5. Finding:Impacts related to Cultural Resources are discussed in detail in Section 5.4 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not cause a substantial change in the significance of a historical resource, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Spring Trails Project area was assessed for historical resources during multiple surveys. During this assessment, no historical resources, as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, were observed. (EIR at 5.4-12). There are no structures, buildings, or other built environment resources with historical value in the project area. (Id.). Therefore, there are no known historical resources on the Project site, and no mitigation is required. b.Development in Sensitive Archaeological Area. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project would be developed in a sensitive archeological area, as identified in the City’s General Plan. 22 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 794 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding:Impacts related to Cultural Resources are discussed in detail in Section 5.4 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not be developed in a sensitive archeological area as identified in the City’s General Plan, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project site is not located in an area of concern for archaeological resources, and is not located within an area of known resources or areas that could reasonably contain resources and which had demonstrable surface integrity as of November 1987. (See EIR Figure 5.4-1). Therefore, no mitigation is required. 5.Geology and Soils. a. Cut and Fill. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project would involve earth movement (cut and/or fill). Finding:Impacts related to Geology and Soils are discussed in detail at Section 5.5 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that while the Project would involve grading on about 216.7 acres of land, with roughly 3.1 million cubic yards of cut and 2.8 million cubic yards of fill, Project earth movement would not result in substantial adverse erosion or dust impacts and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: In addition to the specified amounts of cut and fill grading, the Project would involve roughly 251,000 cubic yards of soil export. (See EIR Table 5.5-2). Project features are incorporated into the Spring Trails Specific Plan that would minimize soil erosion. (EIR at 5.5-21). For example, all graded slopes shall be stabilized and planted with the approved trees, shrubs, and groundcovers listed in the Landscape Zones Plant Palette, Table 3.6 in the Specific Plan Design Guidelines. The Grading Plan in the Development Standards for the Spring Trails Specific Plan has been devised with overall goals, including minimizing grading quantities, minimizing slope maintenance and water consumption, and providing for stable slopes and building pads. (Id.). Specific guidelines in the Grading Plan include: minimize grading where possible; avoid grading in areas where slopes exceed an average of 15 percent to the greatest extent possible; terrace drains and benches shall be added where slope height exceeds 30 feet, in accordance with the Uniform Building Code. (Id.). In some instances, benches should be widened to provide for dual use as a 23 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 795 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations recreation trail; existing significant drainage courses shall be maintained as much as possible; final grading design shall adhere to the final soils report recommendations; grading shall be performed under the supervision of a registered soils engineer; a storm water pollution prevention program (“SWPPP”) must be prepared and processed prior to grading; natural terrain must be preserved as much as possible by focusing development in the development footprint; earth retention systems, where slopes can be planted to blend with the natural terrain, should be used where possible; and all cut-and-fill slopes shall be revegetated to control erosion. (EIR at 5.5-22). These guidelines would meet City and state development standards and soil stability would be maintained. In addition, the Safety Plan requires that Grading for building pads and roads shall conform to specifications of the geologist, based on a soils study and final geotechnical study. (Id.). In addition to the Project guidelines and development standards described above, the Project would prepare and implement a SWPPP specifying BMPs for minimizing pollution of stormwater during project construction. Categories of BMPs that would be included in the SWPPP include erosion control BMPs that cover and/or bind soil to prevent soil from entering runoff; and sediment control BMPs, such as barriers, that intercept and filter out soil that has been detached and transported by flowing water. Implementation of BMPs specified in the SWPPP would help stabilize project site slopes while vegetation planted by the Project matures. (Id.). After implementation of Project guidelines, Specific Plan development standards, and BMPs for erosion control and sediment control to be specified in the project’s SWPPP, Project development is not expected to result in substantial erosion, and no mitigation is required. b. Potential Significant Impact: Landslides, Mudslides or Subsidence. Whether the Project site is subject to potential hazards from landslides, mudslides or subsidence. Finding:Impacts related to Geology and Soils are discussed in detail at Section 5.5 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project site is not subject to potential hazards from landslides, mudslides or subsidence and, therefore, no mitigation is required. 24 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 796 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Finding: The maximum gradient of the natural slopes on the site approach is 1.2:1 (horizontal:vertical). Proposed cut-and- fill slopes would be designed at grades of 2:1, with maximum slope heights of 80 feet. Such cut-and-fill slopes have been analyzed and found to be grossly stable. (EIR at 5.5-24). Cut slopes that expose bedrock will tend to weather over time and would be planted with deep-rooted vegetation. No surface indications of slope instability or significant “out of slope” geologic bedding conditions were observed onsite, and no significant natural slope instability exists onsite. (Id.). The site plan avoids the lower portions of Cable Canyon and Meyers Canyon, which could act as channels for mudflows. The site plan also avoids the steeper slopes near the northern end of the site. All cut-and- fill slopes created by the Project would be vegetated, thereby controlling erosion and reducing mudflow hazard. There are no substantial groundwater or oil withdrawals in the area that could lead to subsidence, and the potential for ground subsidence is regarded as low. (Id.). Therefore, no mitigation is required. c.Expansive Soils. Potential Significant Impact:Whether Project development would create substantial hazards arising from expansive soils. Finding:Impacts related to Geology and Soils are discussed in detail at Section 5.5 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that Project development would not create substantial hazards arising from expansive soils and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Expansive soils are generally characterized as having the ability to undergo significant volume change due to increases or decreases in the moisture content of the soil. (EIR at 5.5-25). The Spring Trails site is predominated by relatively recent alluvial deposits (from the Holocene and Pleistocene age). These deposits have led to the existence of sands and sands with gravel in the upper layers (5 to 10 feet deep) and the gravelly sands (sand with silt, cobbles, and occasional boulders) of the lower layers (below 10 feet). (Id.). These layers are generally medium dense to very dense throughout most of the site and have dry to moist conditions. The geotechnical analysis did not determine these soils to be prone to expansion. Therefore, the expansion potential of soils is low to very low. (Id.). No 25 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 797 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations specific geotechnical recommendations for expansive soils were made, and no mitigation is required. d. Potential Significant Impact: Modification of Unique Geological Feature. Whether Project development would modify a unique geological feature. Finding:Impacts related to Geology and Soils are discussed in detail at Section 5.5 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that although the Project will be developed over the San Andreas Fault, the Project will not substantially change the physical and geological characteristics of the fault and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The San Andreas Fault is considered to be a unique geological feature, and five splays of the San Andreas Fault occur on the site. (EIR at 5.5-7). The majority of the segment of Splay A on the Project site would remain open space, while the balance of the splay would be graded. Most of Splays B, C, and D would be graded, and most of Splay E would remain open space. (EIR at 5.5-25). However, the grading on Splays A, B, C, D, and E would not substantially change the physical and geological characteristics of the fault, and therefore, no mitigation is required. e.Unstable Soils. Whether Project grading and construction would bePotential Significant Impact: conducted so as to result in substantial amounts of unstable soils. Finding:Impacts related to Geology and Soils are discussed in detail at Section 5.5 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that Project grading and construction will not be conducted so as to result in substantial amounts of unstable soils and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Project features are incorporated into the Spring Trails Specific Plan that would prevent grading and construction activities from creating substantial amounts of unstable soils. (EIR at 5.5-25). Specifically, the following development standards in the Grading Plan and Safety Plan of the Spring Trails Specific Plan would aid in preventing the creation of substantial amounts of unstable soils: 1) final grading design shall adhere to the final soils report recommendations; 2) grading shall be performed under the 26 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 798 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations supervision of a registered soils engineer; and 3) final grading plans shall be prepared and certified by a registered civil engineer and registered geotechnical engineer in the State of California Board of Professional Registration and approved by the City Engineer. (Id.). Thus, impacts in this area will be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. f. Potential Significant Impact: Hillside Management Overlay Zoning District. Whether the Project would conflict with the provisions of the Hillside Management Overlay Zoning District (“HMOD”). Finding:Impacts related to Geology and Soils are discussed in detail at Section 5.5 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project’s development standards will replace the provisions of the HMOD and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Roughly 67 percent (133 acres) of the Project site is within the HMOD, which covers all areas with slopes of 15 percent or greater. (EIR at 5.5-26). The HMOD contains development performance standards, including standards regarding soils and grading, geotechnical standards, and standards requiring that vegetation on slopes, including graded slopes, be preserved or reestablished. (Id.). The Specific Plan for the Project contains hillside design and development standards that have been prepared to be site- specific for the proposed project and are consistent with the General Plan. The HMOD design guidelines would not be necessary. Thus, no mitigation is required. g.Cumulative Impacts. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project would result in cumulatively significant impacts to Geology and Soils. Finding:Impacts related to Geology and Soils are discussed in detail at Section 5.5 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that Project will not result in cumulatively significant impacts to Geology and Soils and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Impacts to geology and soils are specific to the geologic and soils conditions on a particular project site. Mitigation of geologic, seismic, and soil impacts of development projects would also be specific to each site. Compliance 27 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 799 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations with modern building standards, such as the UBC and CBC, serves to reduce seismic-related risks. Therefore, no adverse cumulative impacts related to soils and geology are anticipated, and no mitigation is required. (EIR at 5.5-26). 6.Hazards and Hazardous Materials. a. Potential Significant Impact: Routine Transport, Use, and/or Disposal of Hazardous Materials. Whether the Project would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; or through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Finding:Impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials are discussed in detail at Section 5.6 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the risk to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; or through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment by the Project is less than significant and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed Project includes 304 single-family lots under the preferred development scenario (reduced to 215 lots), or 307 single-family lots under the alternative development scenario. These will consist of new single-family lots, and one existing single-family residence in the western portion of the site, bordering Cable Canyon Creek to the south. If the existing single-family home were to be demolished prior to Project construction, it may result in the need to transport and dispose of hazardous materials. (EIR at 5.6- 9). However, it is anticipated to remain during and after development of the Project, and therefore no demolition activities are anticipated. (Id.). In general, the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials is associated with industrial land uses and not residential land uses. The Project would consist only of residential land uses with associated parks and open space. Construction and operation of the new single-family homes may include the use of hazardous substances such as paints, solvents, finishes, and cleaners, but these substances would not be substantially different from other household products. (Id.). Additionally, the site has not been included on any state or federal lists of hazardous materials sites, so the 28 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 800 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations development of the site would not necessitate the removal or cleanup of any hazardous materials. Therefore, it is not anticipated that construction or operation activities would involve inadvertent exposure to hazardous materials due to their removal from the site. (Id.). The routine transport, use, and/or disposal of significant amounts of hazardous materials is not expected to occur during the construction or operation of this Project. (Id.). Since there would not be any substantial amount of hazardous materials present on the Project site for a significant amount of time during Project construction or operation, there would also not be any foreseeable upset or release of hazardous materials, and therefore no mitigation is required. b. Potential Significant Impact: Emergency Response or Evacuation Plan. Whether the Project would impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Finding:Impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials are discussed in detail at Section 5.6 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The City has an emergency management plan and a hazard mitigation plan that outline the potential risks, hazards, and emergency situations that the City may face and the best methods for preventing or managing these situations. (EIR at 5.6-10). The emergency management plan and the hazard mitigation plan, which have been developed in compliance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, are used by the City to reduce and eliminate the effects of natural and human-caused disasters. Spring Trails would follow the guidelines and regulations of the City’s emergency and hazard mitigation plans. Since the site has high potential for fires, there is substantial need for fire emergency access. (Id.). The Spring Trails Specific Plan includes measures that would allow the site to be accessible during fire emergencies and which can be applicable for other emergencies. These are outlined in the City’s Foothill Fire Zone Overlay District requirements, and Spring Trails’ compliance with these standards is substantiated in Appendix D of the Specific Plan. (See EIR Table 5.14-7). In sum, the proposed Project would not conflict with the 29 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 801 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations City’s emergency planning, and therefore no mitigation is required. c. Potential Significant Impact: Cumulative Impacts. Whether the Project would result in cumulatively significant impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Finding:Impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials are discussed in detail at Section 5.6 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project would not result in cumulatively significant impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The assessment of potential cumulative impacts with regard to hazards and hazardous materials relates to the ability for impacts to occur offsite. (EIR at 5.6-23). The hazardous materials study area considered for cumulative impacts consisted of (1) the area that could be affected by proposed Project activities, and (2) the areas affected by other projects where activities could directly or indirectly affect the presence or fate of hazardous materials on the proposed Project site. (Id.). The land uses surrounding the Project site are either vacant or residential. There would be little chance for a hazardous materials release in the surrounding area that would cause cumulative impacts with the proposed Project. Cumulative analysis for fire and wind hazards is completed with similar parameters. (Id.). Cumulative impacts could occur when adjacent projects, in combination with the proposed Project, would increase the number of people being exposed to fire and wind hazards. (Id.). At this time no development is planned for the areas adjacent to the proposed Project; thus, no cumulative impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required. 7.Hydrology/Water Quality a. Alter Existing Drainage Pattern. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project would substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite. 30 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 802 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding:Impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.7 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that development of the Project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Drainage from Offsite: At Project completion, offsite drainage would enter the project site from the north and east. (EIR at 5.7-16). Two drainage courses within Drainage Area A that flow into the site from the north are Cable Canyon West and East Forks. These two drainages, which merge onsite, would remain undisturbed and would exit the west side of the site as they do now. Four drainages would enter the site from the east. The northerly two of these drainages are tributaries to Cable Canyon and are in Drainage Area A. (EIR Figure 3-8). These two drainages would pass through a culvert under proposed Street “A”, merge and continue flowing westerly, pass through a culvert under proposed Street “DD”, then continue to the southwest before merging with the West and East forks of Cable Canyon. (EIR at 5.7-16). This combined drainage then flows to the west and exits the site into Cable Creek. South of the Project site, the Cable Creek drainage would pass through culverts under the Secondary Access Road. The third drainage course that enters the site from the east would be collected in a proposed brow ditch north of proposed Street “O” and west of proposed Street “W”. This drainage would then be conveyed around the water reservoir tank and discharged to an existing flow line. (Id.). The last drainage course entering the site from the east consists of Meyers Canyon and tributary areas in Drainage Area D; Meyers Canyon enters the site near its southeast corner. A culvert crossing is proposed under the Primary Access Road (Street “A”). (See EIR Figure 3-8). Drainage from Onsite: Drainage from the site at Project completion would be conveyed in a series of storm drain systems that would route water into three Extended Detention Basins for treatment and detention. (Id.). (EIR Table 5.7-2 and Figure 3-8). Drainage Area A consists of Cable Canyon, including the west and east forks of Cable Canyon and tributary areas. (EIR at 5.7-17). Drainage from the two northernmost residential areas, north of Cable Canyon, would not be routed into an extended detention 31 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 803 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations basin, but routed instead into media filtration vaults where the water quality volume would be treated, after which the runoff would be discharged into Cable Canyon. Water quality volumes for each detention basin that would be built as part of the Project are listed in EIR Table 5.7-3. One of these areas is 17.3 acres, while the second is 22.0 acres. Basin “A” compensates for this discharge from the site into Cable Canyon by over-detaining runoff from other parts of Drainage Area A onsite. (Id.). Drainage Area B, 45.5 acres in area, is divided into two subareas. Subarea 1 would be the developed area onsite of 21.8 acres that would be routed into basin “B” plus the 1.6-acre basin and 4.6 acres of open space downstream of the basin outlet. Subarea 2 would be 17.5 acres of onsite and offsite undeveloped area that would cross under Street “I” and then discharge into an existing flow line. (EIR at 5.7-18). Drainage Area “C” consists of 209.8 acres, roughly 89.0 acres of which would be in the developed area onsite and would drain into basin “C”. The remaining 107.8 acres would be onsite and offsite undeveloped areas that would be collected north of Street “H”. (Id.). Drainage Area “D” consists of 339.3 acres: 319.8 acres offsite and 19.5 onsite. Drainage from Area “D” would enter the site near the southeastern site boundary, flow through a culvert under the proposed Primary Access Road (Street “A”), and then exit the site. This drainage would not be directed into a detention basin or media filtration vault. Surface flows from the secondary access road will be conveyed into a 5- foot concrete drainage ditch located within a 13-foot graded shoulder on both sides of the road. The runoff will then be collected in storm drain inlets and conveyed through a storm drain underneath the secondary access road where it will be discharged into Cable Creek. (Id.). Detention Basin Capacities: Drainage volumes and rates from developed portions of the site would be increased compared to existing conditions due to the increase in impervious surfaces onsite. (Id.). The three proposed detention basins would be local detention facilities maintained by the owner or homeowners association. The maximum capacity of each of the detention basins is designed to store onsite runoff from the drainage area tributary to the respective basin in order to lower the rate of outflow from the basin to the predevelopment rate in a 100- year, 24-hour storm. (Id.). Each basin would also be equipped with water quality treatment features and would 32 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 804 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations provide treatment for runoff. The total capacity and water quality treatment capacity of each of the three basins is listed in EIR Table 5.7-3. Emergency spillways are proposed for each of the three basins to convey the 1,000- year peak flow for the respective basin’s tributary watershed. (Id.). Debris Flows and Culvert Sizes: The Project site is in the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains. (Id.). Therefore, large debris flows may occur in watersheds in the area, especially in years after a fire. Debris flows would increase the volume of material flowing down drainages. (Id.). Culverts in the Project were designed to accommodate estimated debris flow volumes that would occur in a 100-year storm four years following a fire. (EIR Table 5.7-4). Project drainage features would meet requirements of the San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual and would limit runoff from the site at Project completion to existing levels. (EIR at 5.7-19). In sum, impacts to existing drainage patterns will be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b. Potential Significant Impact: Groundwater Recharge. Whether the Project would substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted). Finding:Impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.7 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that development of the Project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Project development would increase impervious surfaces on the Project site. (EIR at 5.7-19). The resulting increase in drainage from most of the developed parts of the site would be conveyed to three extended detention basins. (Id.). Stormwater would infiltrate into underlying sediment through the bottoms of the basins. The Project would not 33 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 805 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations include substantial infiltration zones except for the basins. The infiltration rate in the three basins would total roughly 2.01 cfs. (Id.). At Project completion, onsite groundwater recharge of stormwater from a two-year, 24-hour storm would be reduced about 1.3 percent compared to recharge from the same size storm in existing conditions. (Id.). Project development would not substantially reduce groundwater recharge from the site and therefore, no mitigation is required. c. Potential Significant Impact: 100-Year Flood Hazard Area. Whether the Project would place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map; or place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows. Finding:Potential impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.7 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that development of the Project will not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map; or place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The entire Project site is in FEMA flood hazard zone X, meaning that it is outside of both 100-year and 500-year flood plains. (EIR at 5.7-19). Much of the Project site is on the lower slopes of the San Bernardino Mountains. Large debris flows may occur in local watersheds, especially in years after a fire. After Project development, debris flows originating upstream of the Project site may flow through drainages crossing the site; debris flows are not expected to originate onsite. Culverts where drainages on the site would cross under roadways have been designed to accommodate the increase in volume due to sediment that would occur in a debris flow. All proposed improvements, including building pads, roads, and reservoirs, would be outside of the area that would be flooded by debris flows during a 100-year storm. Project development is not expected to create substantial hazards to persons arising from debris flows. (EIR at 5.7-27). Project development would not result in flood hazards to people or structures or redirect 34 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 806 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations flood flows within a 100-year flood hazard area, and therefore, no mitigation is required. d.Violate Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project would violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water quality. Finding:Impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.7 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that development of the Project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements and will not otherwise substantially degrade water quality, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Construction: Potential sources of pollutants from construction activities on the site include exposed soil, construction materials, and construction equipment. (EIR at 5.7-20). Project clearing, grading, excavation, and construction activities may impact water quality due to sheet erosion of exposed soils and subsequent deposition of particles and pollutants in drainage ways. (Id.). Grading activities in particular lead to exposed areas of loose soil, as well as sediment stockpiles which are susceptible to uncontrolled sheet flow. The use of materials such as fuels, solvents, and paints also present a risk to surface water quality due to an increased potential for these materials and related pollutants to contaminate stormwater. Additionally, storage, refueling, and maintenance of construction equipment onsite result in the potential for fuels and other substances to contaminate stormwater. (Id.). Measures for reducing potential pollution from construction activities would include obtaining coverage under the General Construction Permit for discharges of stormwater runoff from the construction site. (Id.). The General Construction Permit is the coverage issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (“SWRCB”) that allows the discharges of stormwater to waters of the United States from construction projects. In order to get coverage under the General Construction Permit, the discharge should be in compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) and implement a Storm Water Sampling and Analysis Strategy for monitoring of construction site runoff. In order to obtain coverage under 35 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 807 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the General Construction Permit, the Project owner would be required to submit a Notice of Intent to the SWRCB to file for permit coverage, and prepare and implement a SWPPP onsite. A Notice of Intent must be filed, and the SWPPP must be prepared prior to commencement of soil- disturbing activities at the Project site. (Id.). The SWPPP must contain a site map(s) showing the construction site perimeter, existing and proposed buildings, lots, roadways, stormwater collection and discharge points, general topography before and after construction, and drainage patterns across the Project. The SWPPP must list BMPs that would be used to protect stormwater runoff and describe the placement of those BMPs. Additionally, the SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program and a chemical monitoring program for “nonvisible” pollutants to be implemented if there is a failure of the BMPs. (Id.). Typical temporary BMPs that would be used during construction include good housekeeping practices and erosion and sediment control measures. Good housekeeping practices include street sweeping, waste disposal, vehicle and equipment maintenance, concrete washout area, materials storage, minimization of hazardous materials, and proper handling and storage of hazardous materials. (Id.). Design standards for the BMPs are set forth by the County of Bernardino and the California Storm Water Management handbooks. Construction BMPs for this project would be selected, constructed, and maintained so as to comply with all applicable ordinances and guidance documents.(EIR at 5.7-22). Upon implementation BMPs as specified in the project’s SWPPP, Project construction would not result in substantial pollution of receiving waters, and therefore, no mitigation is required. (Id.). Operations: Pollutant sources that are expected to be generated by Project operation are sediment/turbidity, nutrients, trash and debris, oxygen-demanding substances, bacteria and viruses, oil and grease, and pesticides. (Id.). With regard to the operational phase of the Project, site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs as dictated by County and City Stormwater management plans would be implemented. (Id.). The residences surrounding the Project site are reliant upon well water for their potable water usage. In some cases, these wells are relatively shallow, with a water table of approximately 50 feet or more. Although historical farming uses and the related 36 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 808 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations fertilizers and other amendments have not had an impact on the water table, BMPs would be used to reduce contaminants in runoff from the Project site, lessening any potential impacts to potable drinking water to nearby residences. (EIR Tables 5.7-5 to 5.7-7). A Project-specific water quality management plan (“WQMP”) (EIR Appendix I1) has been prepared for the Project, and specifies site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs as required by the San Bernardino County Stormwater Program Model Water Quality Management Plan Guidance. The site design BMPs, source control BMPs, and treatment control BMPs incorporated into the Project plans must address the potential pollutants from the Project. (EIR at 5.7-24). The WQMP includes BMPs that would be implemented during both design and operation of the Project, and describes long-term operation and maintenance requirements for BMPs. (EIR Table 5-7-7). The Project applicant would be responsible for carrying out all BMP operations and maintenance activities. (EIR at 5.7-25). Prior to building or grading permit closeout or the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or certificate of use, the applicant shall demonstrate: that all structural BMPs have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications; that the applicant is prepared to implement all nonstructural BMPs described in the approved Project-specific WQMP; and that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project-specific WQMP are available for the future owners/occupants. (EIR at 5.7- 26). After implementation of site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs, as specified in the Project’s WQMP, Project operations would not cause substantial pollution of receiving waters, and no mitigation is required. e.Create or Contribute Runoff Water. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, such as from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks, or other outdoor areas. . Finding:Impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.7 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with 37 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 809 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the City finding that development of the Project will not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Design standards for BMPs are set forth by the County of San Bernardino and the California Storm Water Management handbooks, and construction BMPs for this Project would be selected, constructed, and maintained so as to comply with all applicable ordinances and guidance documents. Upon implementation BMPs as specified in the project’s SWPPP, Project construction would not result in substantial pollution of receiving waters. (EIR at 5.7-22). Site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs as dictated by the County and City Stormwater management plans would be implemented. The Project-specific WQMP would be required by the City of San Bernardino to address management of urban runoff from the Project site, and specifically address site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs to minimize the impact of urban runoff from the Project. Site design BMPs would be used to control and filter runoff from residential uses for collection in detention basins located at strategic points on the Project site. (Id.). On- and offsite stormwater would be collected and routed through a series of catch basins, inlets, and storm drain systems that would convey water to three extended detention basins for water quality treatment and detention. These systems would be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of San Bernardino and the San Bernardino County Flood Control District standards. Properly engineered basins reduce infiltration issues by adsorbing common residential chemicals into basin linings. (Id.). Successful implementation of the controls contained in the WQMP would reduce the amount of contaminants in surface flow and groundwater by controlling the contaminants at the source. (EIR at 5.7-23). Accordingly, the potential for the Project to create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff is less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 38 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 810 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations f. Potential Significant Impact: Dam Failure. Whether the Project would expose people or structures to a significant risk of injury, loss or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. Finding:Impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.7 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that development of the Project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of injury, loss or death involving flooding (including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam), and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: There are no dams or enclosed bodies of water upstream from the Project site that could pose a hazard of flooding to the site due to a seiche or the failure of a dam. (EIR at 5.7-27). The Project would involve construction and operation of three reservoirs onsite. (EIR Figure 3-9). The reservoirs would have capacities of 900,000 gallons, 900,000 gallons, and 2,500,000 gallons. The reservoirs would be enclosed tanks, the design and construction of which would comply with existing seismic safety regulations. (EIR at 5.7-27). Accordingly, the risk of flooding is less than significant, and no mitigation is required. g.Cumulative Impacts. Whether the Project would result in cumulativelyPotential Significant Impact: significant impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality. Finding:Impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.7 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that development of the Project will not result in cumulatively significant impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Potential related projects are those development projects that would increase the amount of impervious surfaces and consequently cause increased runoff within the Santa Ana River Watershed. (EIR at 5.7-27). Each related project would be required to include project features that would detain onsite any increase in runoff from 100-year storm events until after the storm. After the construction and 39 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 811 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations operation of required drainage features within related projects, substantial cumulative impacts to the capacity of the storm drainage system in the region are not expected to occur. (Id.). Given that the proposed Project would also be required to include drainage features so that the Project would not cause a net increase in runoff into the existing storm drainage system in the region, the Project is not anticipated to have a cumulatively considerable adverse impact on storm drainage capacity. Reach Four of the Santa Ana River, downstream from the vicinity of the Project site, is included on the 303(d) list as impaired by pathogens (bacteria and viruses). Therefore, pathogens are pollutants of concern in the vicinity of the Project site. (Id.). Other projects in the Santa Ana Watershed can be expected to increase the amounts of contaminants that could enter stormwater. (EIR at 5.7-28). However, other projects would be required to comply with the same NPDES regulations for minimizing water pollution as would the proposed project. Related projects would be required to prepare and implement SWPPPs and WQMPs, specifying BMPs that would be used to minimize contaminants discharged into receiving waters. After compliance with existing regulations, cumulative impacts to water quality are not expected to be substantial, and the Project is not anticipated to have cumulatively considerable impacts on water quality. (Id.). Thus, no mitigation is required. 8.Land Use and Planning. a. Potential Significant Impact: Conflict with Land Use Plans. Whether the Project would conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Finding:Impacts related to Land Use and Planning are discussed in detail at Section 5.8 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, and therefore, no mitigation is required. 40 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 812 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Finding: General Plan/Specific Plan: The Project would be consistent with the City of San Bernardino General Plan. (EIR at 5.8-13). Under the existing General Plan designation of RE, the maximum density is one dwelling unit per acre. The Project would require a General Plan Amendment to change the existing land use designation to Residential Low (RL), allowing 3.1 dwelling units per acre, an increase of 2.1 dwelling units per acre. The Project would be annexed into the City of San Bernardino and zoned RE (consistent with existing prezoning). (Id.). The Project’s overall density would be 0.87 dwelling units per acre. The density on the developed area (241.5 acres) would be 1.27 dwelling units per acre. (EIR at 5.8-14). Development will be focused, or clustered, onto approximately 241.5 acres, or 68 percent of the total site, and includes 9 acres of parks and 125.1 acres of internal slopes and fuel modification zones. The remaining 32 percent of Spring Trails (111.3 acres) is preserved as natural open space. The average lot size in Spring Trails is 29,000 square feet. The largest lots are on the northern portion and upper elevations of the site, and the largest lot measures 18.3 acres. (Id.). The smallest lots are on the lower elevations and southern portion of the Project, and the smallest lot measures 10,801 square feet. In many instances, the legal lots will extend beyond the buildable area and include graded slopes, fuel modification zones, steep slopes, and open spaces. (Id.). The Preferred Development Plan is the same as the Alternative Development Plan in every respect except for the treatment of the land beneath the aboveground electric lines and the number of residential lots. (Id.). In this respect, the Preferred Development Plan differs from the Preferred Development Plan in that it would provide 126 acres of internal slopes and fuel modification zones, and 70 acres would be attributable to residential lots. The Preferred Development Plan contains 304 single-family detached units and the overall density over the 350-acre site would be 0.86 dwelling units per acre. The density on the developed area (241.5 acres) would be 1.26 dwelling units per acre. The Project would exceed County General Plan designation RL-5 of one dwelling unit per five acres. However, once annexed into the City of San Bernardino, the Project would be consistent with the General Plan and Development Code. (Id.). 41 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 813 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Specific plans are required to be consistent with the goals and policies of the governing general plan. The Project implements and exemplifies the goals and policies of the City of San Bernardino General Plan. (EIR Table 5.8-1). Future development within the Spring Trails Specific Plan area must be consistent with this Specific Plan. All projects that are found to be consistent with this Specific Plan will likewise be deemed consistent with the City’s General Plan. (Id.). San Bernardino County Association of Governments (SCAG): The proposed Project will be consistent with the applicable SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) policies. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in significant land use impacts related to relevant SCAG policies, goals, and principles. (EIR Table 5.8-2). Likewise, the Project will be consistent with the applicable goals of the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan (“RTP”), and implementation of the Project would not result in significant land use impacts related to relevant RTP goals. (EIR Table 5.8-3). The Project will also be consistent with advisory SCAG Compass Growth Vision (“CGV”) principles, and would not result in significant land use impacts related to the advisory CGV principles. (EIR Table 5.8-4). San Bernardino National Forest Land Management Plan (“SBNF”): The northern portion of the Project site (approximately 160 acres) is located within the boundaries of the SBNF. The upper 160 acres of the Project are private lands within the SBNF. Since the Project site is privately held, it is not subject to the Land Management Plan. However, all areas adjacent to the Project site, within the SBNF, are subject to the Land Management Plan. Public access by residents would be restricted and unlawful. (EIR at 5.8-47). Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation Plan: In 1999, the USFS proposed to prohibit road construction and reconstruction in inventoried roadless areas within the national forests. That portion of the SBNF surrounding the Project site (at the Project boundary), and continuing in the northwesterly direction is identified as an inventoried roadless area. However, the Project site is not within the inventoried roadless area, and is thus not subject to this plan. (See EIR Figure 5.8-1). 42 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 814 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations City of San Bernardino Tree Ordinance: The development of the Project would remove up to 2,400 trees (220 native species, 2,170 eucalyptus, and 10 ornamental nonnative trees) from the Project site. The majority of the eucalyptus trees were planted as part of a eucalyptus plantation. The applicant would be required to replace the 220 native tree species with similar native species, as required by the City’s tree ordinance. The required tree replacement has been incorporated as Project Mitigation Measure 3-13, which would ensure the project’s compliance with the City’s tree ordinance. In sum, because the Project will not conflict with any land use plan, policy or regulation, impacts in this area are less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b. Potential Significant Impact: Development Within Hillside Management Overlay District. Whether development would occur within the Hillside Management Overlay District. Finding:Impacts related to Land Use and Planning are discussed in detail at Section 5.8 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project’s development standards will replace the provisions of the HMOD and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project site would be subject to the HMOD since it would involve development in areas of 15 percent slope or greater. (See EIR Figure 5.8-2). The overall goals of the site-specific grading guidelines are to minimize the height of visible slopes, provide for more natural-appearing manufactured slopes, minimize grading quantities, minimize slope maintenance and water consumption, and provide for stable slopes and building pads. (EIR at 5.8-48). The total Project area that is proposed for grading is 216.7 acres, which includes 193.0 acres onsite and 23.7 acres offsite. Onsite grading encompasses roughly 2.7 million cubic yards and would balance onsite. (The primary access road would require approximately 171,000 cubic yards of cut and 55,000 cubic yards of fill, which necessitates exporting approximately 116,000 cubic yards. The secondary access street would require 244,000 cubic yards of cut and 109,000 cubic yards of fill, which necessitates exporting approximately 135,000 cubic yards. Total export equals 251,000 cubic yards. (Id.). Spring Trails has been responsibly designed to fit into the existing 43 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 815 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations landscape, at the same time meeting the intent of the HMOD. Project development would avoid steep hillside areas and clusters development in the lower foothill areas. This has the following benefits in terms of grading impacts: o Minimizes hillside grading and scarring that would be visible from public rights-of-way; o Preserves the Cable Canyon and Meyers Canyon drainage courses in their natural conditions and minimizes impacts on natural topography; o Maintains significant natural drainage courses within the proposed development area to enhance water quality. (Id.). The Specific Plan for the Project contains hillside design and development standards that have been prepared to be site-specific for the proposed project and are consistent with the General Plan. The HMOD design guidelines would not be necessary. Thus, no mitigation is required. c. Potential Significant Impact: Development Within Foothill Fire Zones. Whether development would occur within Foothill Fire Zones A and B or C, as identified in the City’s General Plan. Finding:Impacts related to Land Use and Planning are discussed in detail at Section 5.8 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that although development of the Project will be within Foothill Fire Zones A and B and C, all development will comply with the Foothill Fire Overlay District standards and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The overlay district identifies 3 foothill fire zones: A, Extreme Hazard; B, High Hazard; and C, Moderate Hazard. Approximately one third of the site is in Fire Zone A, one third of the site is in Fire Zone B, and the remaining third is in Fire Zone C. (EIR Figure 5.8-2). Areas in the Foothill Fire Zones are required to be developed with proper building separation, landscaping, and building materials; adequate emergency access and evacuation routes; and sufficient water resources. (EIR at 5.8-48). To ensure the safety of property and lives, a detailed fire safety analysis was conducted by FireSafe Planning Solutions and a fire protection plan was prepared, which factored in wind patterns, fuel types (vegetation), topography, weather patterns, and historical burn patterns to determine the 44 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 816 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations potential severity of wildfires and appropriate protection methods. (EIR at 5.8-49). A comparison of the provisions of this Specific Plan with the Foothill Fire Overlay District is provided in Appendix D of the Specific Plan. The table in Appendix D shows the Project’s compliance with the Foothill Fire Overlay District standards for access and circulation, site and street identification, roadside vegetation, water supply, erosion control, construction and development design, and other miscellaneous standards such as disclosure to property owners and responsible parties for fuel modification zone maintenance. Spring Trails is compliant with all standards laid out in the Foothill Fire Overlay District. (Id.). The fire protection plan prepared by Fire Safe Planning Solutions was approved by the San Bernardino County Fire Department and incorporated into the Spring Trails Specific Plan. Accordingly, the potential for impacts related to development within Foothill Fire Zones is less than significant, and no mitigation is required. d. Potential Significant Impact: Cumulative Impacts. Whether the Project would result in cumulatively significant impacts related to Land Use and Planning. Finding:Impacts related to Land Use and Planning are discussed in detail at Section 5.8 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not result in cumulatively significant impacts related to Land Use and Planning and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Development of the Project, in addition to other cumulative development, could cause City-wide land use and planning impacts. (EIR at 5.8-49). However, upon adoption of the Spring Trails Specific Plan, the Project would be consistent with applicable plans, policies, and regulations of the San Bernardino General Plan, the City’s zoning regulations, and SCAG’s RCPG and RTP. (Id.). Additionally, as with the proposed Project, other cumulative projects would also be subject to compliance with the local and regional plans reviewed in this section. (Id.). Implementation of the cumulative projects would not combine with the proposed Project to result in cumulatively considerable land use impacts, and no mitigation is required. 45 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 817 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 9.Mineral Resources. a. Potential Significant Impact: Loss of Mineral Resources. Whether the Project would result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state; or result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. Finding:Impacts related to Mineral Resources are discussed in detail at Section 5.9 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not result in the loss of availability of any known mineral resource, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Younger alluvium is present on the Project site, which may be suitable as construction aggregate, but is present onsite in limited amounts, mainly in Cable Canyon and Myers Canyon. (See EIR Figure 5.5-1). Most of the site surface consists of older terrace deposits, which are not thought to be suitable as aggregate because the boulders and gravel in these deposits are moderately weathered and crumbly, suggesting they break down easily. (EIR at 5.9-4). There are no mineral resource recovery sites designated in the City of San Bernardino General Plan on or near the Project site, and there are no existing mineral resource recovery operations on or next to the Project site. (Id.). Accordingly, impacts to mineral resources will be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 10.Noise. a.Substantial Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project would result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the Project; specifically, whether based on the City of San Bernardino standard for maximum outdoor noise levels in residential areas, Project- related traffic would increase the CNEL at any noise- sensitive receptor by an audible amount, 3 dBA and ambient noise levels exceed 65 dBA. Finding:Potential Noise impacts of the Project are discussed in detail at Section 5.10 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not result in a substantial permanent increase in 46 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 818 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project, because Project-related traffic will not increase the CNEL at any noise- sensitive receptor by an audible amount, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The operations phase of the Project would generate noise primarily associated with vehicular trips. (EIR at 5.10-17). According to the Project’s traffic impact analysis, the Project would generate 3,149 average daily trips (ADT), with 247 trips in the morning peak-hour and 333 trips in the evening peak hour. (Id.). A 3 dB change in noise levels is considered to be the minimum change discernible to the human ear. (Id.). Project-related traffic at buildout year 2013 would cause noise levels to increase by more than 3 dBA on the new access roads, along Little League Drive, and Belmont Avenue between Little League Drive and Magnolia Avenue. (EIR Figure 5.10-6). However, ambient noise levels would not exceed 65 dBA CNEL under year 2013 with Project conditions along these roadways. A portion of the segment of Little League Drive south of Frontage Road would be within the 65 dBA CNEL ambient noise contour, however, there are no noise-sensitive receptors present. (EIR at 5.10-18). Consequently, implementation of the Project would not cause a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels; noise impacts would be less than significant in year 2013, and no mitigation is required. b.Noise Levels in Excess of Standards. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project would result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; specifically, whether noise generated by buildout of the Project would result in stationary (non-transportation) noise that results in a noise nuisance at noise-sensitive receptors as determined in Chapter 8.54, Noise Control, of the City’s Municipal Code; or result in interior noise levels in habitable noise- sensitive areas that exceed 45 dBA CNEL or exterior noise levels at single-family residential noise-sensitive areas exceed 65 dBA CNEL. Finding:Potential Noise impacts of the Project are discussed in detail at Section 5.10 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of any standard, and therefore, no mitigation is required. 47 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 819 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Finding: Noise may have a significant impact if the Project constructs a noise-sensitive land use in an area that is incompatible due to excessive noise. (EIR at 5.10-18). The City of San Bernardino has adopted a land use compatibility criterion for the siting of new noise-sensitive land uses within the City. (See EIR Table 5.10-3). Per the City of San Bernardino General Plan, noise-impacted projects are defined as residential projects with noise levels that exceed the City’s “Normally Acceptable” compatibility criteria. For residential projects, noise-impacted projects are those that are exposed to exterior noise levels of 65 dBA CNEL or greater. Noise-impacted projects are required by the City to include upgraded noise insulation features (e.g., windows, doors, attic baffling) that achieve an exterior-to-interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL. (EIR at 5.10-18). The majority of future ambient noise at the Project area would be generated by local roadway traffic. (Id.). Noise-sensitive portions of the Project site include the interior of the residential dwelling units, and the exterior noise-sensitive areas of these uses. Traffic on the local roadways under Year 2013 With Project conditions would not generate noise levels that exceed the exterior noise level of 65 dBA CNEL. (EIR Figure 5.10-5). Noise- sensitive uses would be exposed to exterior noise levels of 50 dBA CNEL and under. Pursuant to the California Building Code, noise-sensitive habitable rooms would be required to be designed to achieve an interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. In general, exterior-to-interior transmission loss from standard building construction results in a minimum attenuation of 24 dBA under windows-closed conditions and 12 dBA under windows- open conditions. (EIR at 5.10-18). Therefore, interior noise levels would not exceed the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Consequently, noise impacts at the onsite noise-sensitive receptors would be less than significant. Residential uses would generate stationary noise sources on the Project site, including heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units from residential units, and noise from landscaping activities. (EIR at 5.10-27). HVAC units and other equipment would be acoustically engineered with mufflers and barriers to ensure that no exceedance of the City’s noise standards would occur. (Id.). Consequently, proposed residential uses would not generate substantial noise, and impacts to nearby noise- 48 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 820 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations sensitive receptors would be less than significant. Thus, no mitigation is required. c. Potential Significant Impact: Groundborne Vibration. Whether the Project would result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels;specifically,whether construction equipment would produce perceptible levels of vibration (78 VdB) during the daytime at offsite vibration- sensitive structures, or produce vibration that is strong enough to cause vibration-induced architectural damage based on the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), which is 0.2 in/sec for typical wood-framed buildings or 0.5 in/sec for reinforced concrete, steel, or timber structures. Finding:Potential Noise impacts of the Project are discussed in detail at Section 5.10 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Construction operations can generate varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the construction procedures and the construction equipment. (EIR at 5.10-27). Construction equipment can produce vibration from vehicle travel as well as grading and building activities. No pile driving, blasting, or other vibration-intensive activity would be required in the construction effort. (Id.). The highest levels of vibration would be experienced when a heavy piece of construction equipment is operating or passes in proximity to the nearby vibration-sensitive structures. Levels of vibration produced by construction equipment are evaluated against the FTA’s significance threshold for vibration annoyance of 78 VdB for residential structures during the daytime. (Id.). Although the maximum vibration levels associated with certain construction activities could be perceptible in certain instances, vibration events would be infrequent throughout the day, would occur during the least vibration-sensitive portions of the day, and equipment would be used for a short duration when working in close proximity to vibration-sensitive receptors. (EIR at 5.10- 28). Additionally, construction activities are typically distributed throughout a project site. Therefore, construction vibration is based on average vibration levels (levels that would be experienced by sensitive receptors the 49 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 821 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations majority of the time) that exceed the FTA’s criteria for vibration-induced annoyance at sensitive residences during the day of 78 VdB. While construction equipment could operate as close as 65 feet to the nearest offsite vibration- sensitive residential structures (onsite Secondary Access Road), most of the heavy construction equipment would operate at greater distances (average distance of 761 feet). (Id.). Average vibration levels from construction of the Project would not exceed the FTA criteria for vibration annoyance at the surrounding residential uses or at the existing onsite residence. (EIR Table 5.10-7). Consequently, impacts would be less than significant. Development of the Project would require construction of two access roads into the project site from the existing arterials. (EIR at 5.10-28). The primary access road would connect at the southeast entrance of the site and the secondary access road would connect to the southwest entrance of the project site. Roadway construction would include grading, foundation work, and asphalt paving that would extend beyond the Project site boundary into the surrounding properties. (Id.). While construction equipment at the roadway construction areas could operate as close as 55 feet to the nearest offsite vibration-sensitive receptor, most of the heavy construction equipment would operate at greater distances. (Id.). Average vibration levels from construction of the Project would not exceed the FTA criteria for vibration annoyance at the surrounding residential uses. (EIR at Table 5.10-8). Consequently, impacts would be less than significant. The FTA criterion for vibration-induced architectural damage is 0.20 inch per second for the peak particle velocity (“PPV’) for wood-framed structures. (EIR at 5.10-29). Project-related construction vibration was evaluated for its potential to cause architectural damage in comparison to the FTA’s architectural damage criteria for the closest offsite structure. Onsite construction activities associated with the Project would occur at distances that would result in PPV levels below the FTA’s criteria for vibration-induced architectural damage at the nearest off- and onsite vibration-sensitive structures. (EIR Table 5.10-9). Consequently, impacts would be less than significant at off- and onsite receptors. Similar to onsite construction activities, vibration levels from roadway- related construction activities would also result in PPV 50 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 822 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations levels below the FTA’s criteria for vibration-induced architectural damage at the nearest offsite vibration- sensitive structures. (EIR Table 5.10-10). Consequently, impacts would be less than significant at offsite receptors, and no mitigation is required. d. Potential Significant Impact: Cumulative Impacts. Whether the Project would result in or contribute to a significant cumulative noise impact. Finding:Potential Noise impacts of the Project are discussed in detail at Section 5.10 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not result in or contribute to a significant cumulative noise impact, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Project-related cumulative noise impacts may occur if, under Project conditions, there is a substantial increase in overall cumulative noise (3 dBA or more), the Project contributes 0.1 dBA or more to the overall cumulative noise increase, and the ambient noise environment is above 65 dBA CNEL. (EIR at 5.10-36). Buildout year 2013 conditions would not result in any cumulative noise impacts along the roadway segments within the study area. (EIR Figures 5.10-5 to 5.10-7). Roadway segments where the ambient noise environment would be 65 dBA CNEL or higher, such as along Palm Avenue and I-215 corridor, would not result in cumulative noise increases of 3 dB or more under buildout year 2015 with project conditions. (EIR at 5.10-36). For roadway segments—such as the secondary access road from I-215 to the Project site and the primary access road from the Project site to Meyers Road—where cumulative noise would exceed 3 dB under buildout year 2013 conditions, ambient noise levels would not exceed 65 dBA CNEL. (Id.). A small portion of the segment of Little League Drive south of Frontage Road would result in a 3 dB increase in cumulative noise under year 2013 With Project conditions. (Id.). This would be within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, and the Project would contribute at least 0.1 dB to the overall cumulative noise increase. However, there are no noise-sensitive uses in this area. Consequently, the Project’s contribution to cumulative noise would be less than significant, and Project impacts would not be cumulatively considerable for buildout Year 2015 conditions. (Id.). 51 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 823 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Potential noise impacts from Project-related traffic were evaluated to assess cumulative increases in the ambient noise environment in the vicinity of noise-sensitive receptors for horizon year 2030. (Id.). By horizon year 2030, considerable growth in the San Bernardino area is anticipated. Therefore, future traffic growth within the City of San Bernardino in horizon year 2030, in addition to Project-related traffic growth, would also result in increases in the ambient noise levels within the City. The ambient noise along a portion of the primary access road—from Belmont Avenue to just north of Meyers Road—would exceed 65 dBA CNEL, cumulative noise would exceed 3 dB, and the Project would contribute at least 0.1 dB. (EIR Figure 5.10-11). However, there are no existing noise-sensitive receptors within the vicinity of this particular portion of the roadway segment. Other roadway segments, such as Palm Avenue north of I-215, would be within ambient noise levels of 65 dBA CNEL or higher; however, cumulative noise would not exceed 3 dB. Consequently, the Project’s contribution to cumulative noise would be less than significant and project impacts would not be cumulatively considerable for horizon year 2030 With-Project conditions. (EIR at 5.10-37). Unlike transportation noise sources, whose effects can extend well beyond the limits of the project site, stationary noise generated by a project only impacts sensitive receptors adjacent to the project site. (Id.). As no significant stationary noise impacts from Project implementation were identified, and the City of San Bernardino restricts stationary noise generated on a property from creating a nuisance to other noise-sensitive receptors, cumulative stationary-source noise generation would also be less than significant. (Id.). Like stationary-source noise, cumulative construction noise and vibration impacts are confined to a localized area of impact. Consequently, cumulative impacts would only occur if other projects are being constructed in the vicinity of the Project at the same time as the Project. (Id.). Since there are no other planned projects in the vicinity of the Project area, there are no cumulative construction-related noise and vibration impacts. Accordingly, the potential for the Project to result in cumulative noise impacts is less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 52 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 824 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 11.Population and Housing. a. Potential Significant Impact: Substantial Population Growth. Whether the Project would induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure). Finding:Impacts related to Population and Housing are discussed in detail at Section 5.11 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not induce substantial population growth either directly or indirectly, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project would result in a slight population growth in the Project area, by directly introducing up to 304 new single-family residential units (reduced to 215 units, or 711 persons) into the City of San Bernardino. Using an average household size of 3.34 persons, the Project would add up to 1,015 new residents to the City of San Bernardino. (FEIR at 3-12). The population for the City of San Bernardino in 2005 was 201,049 and is projected to increase to 265,515 in 2035. (EIR Table 5.11-1). The City’s General Plan currently designates the Project site as Residential Estate (RE), which allows for one dwelling unit per acre. However, the Project would require a General Plan Amendment to change the existing land use designation to Residential Low (RL), allowing 3.1 dwelling units per acre, an increase of 2.1 dwelling units per acre. (EIR at 5.11-9). The City’s projected buildout population under the existing land use designations is approximately 319,241 (General Plan 2005), which includes 276,264 persons in the City and 42,976 persons in the City’s sphere of influence. The Project would increase the overall buildout population from 319,241 to 320,256, but more specifically, the projected population of 42,976 persons in the City’s sphere of influence would increase to 43,991. The projected population increase that would be generated by the Project would represent approximately 0.32 percent of the buildout population forecast for the City of San Bernardino. Although the proposed land use designation would allow for 2.1 more dwelling units per acre than the existing general plan, the Project would only result in a nominal increase in the overall projected buildout population. (Id.). 53 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 825 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The City of San Bernardino is a jobs-rich community. According to SCAG, the total employment within the City will grow from 81,115 jobs in 2000 to 157,088 jobs in 2035, for a total increase of 75,973 jobs, representing 93.7 percent growth. This reflects an annual growth rate of approximately 2,171 jobs or 2.7 percent. Implementation of the Project would create short-term jobs during the construction phase; however, the Project itself would not provide any jobs. (Id.). SCAG applies the jobs/housing ratio at the regional and sub-regional level as a tool for analyzing the fit between jobs, housing, and infrastructure. Although no ideal jobs/housing ratio is adopted in state, regional, or city policies, SCAG considers an area balanced when the jobs/housing ratio is 1.35; communities with more than 1.5 jobs per dwelling unit are considered jobs- rich. The Project would consist of 309 residential units and would not provide any jobs. (Id.). By 2035, the City is projected to grow by 36.6 percent in housing, 32.1 percent in population, and 65.5 percent in employment. (EIR Table 5.11-5). SCAG’s forecast predicts a strong growth in employment, as the City’s jobs/housing ratio was 1.65 in 2005 and is expected to increase to 2.00 by 2035. The projected 2035 jobs/housing ratio at Project buildout would be 1.99, or 0.01 less than the jobs/housing ratio at buildout without the Project. The Project would create a jobs/housing ratio that is slightly more balanced compared to the projected buildout in the area, improving the jobs/housing ratio within the City. (EIR at 5.11-9). By buildout year 2035, the county is projected to grow by 71.4 percent in housing, 32.1 percent in population, and 65.5 percent in employment. In 2005, the jobs/housing ratio was 1.24 and is projected to increase to 1.29 in 2035, maintaining an overall balance between the number of jobs and number of households within the county. The Project would not change the projected buildout ratio between jobs and housing in the county. (EIR Table 5.11-5). As previously mentioned, there is some variation between the City’s and SCAG forecasts because different growth rates were used to determine the projections. EIR Table 5.11-6 shows the job/housing ratio according to the City’s projections in their General Plan. At Project buildout, the City predicts that their jobs/housing ratio would be 3.7. (EIR at 5.11-10). Infrastructure improvements are required for the Project, and a primary access road would have to be constructed from the terminus of Little League Drive and extended west to the northeastern corner of the Project site, 54 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 826 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations along with a secondary access road. These access roads would only accommodate the Project. The development of the Project would also require the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities and infrastructure, the construction of new pipelines on the Project site, and potentially an upgrade of the existing pipeline at Little League Drive. (Id.). Additionally, there would be three proposed detention basins that would be maintained by the owner or homeowners association. This would improve the fire flow in the higher elevations of the Project site and its vicinity. (EIR at 5.11-11). The Local Agency Formation Commission approved a sphere of influence expansion in September 1996 for the City, which placed the Project site and adjacent area within the City of San Bernardino’s sphere of influence. Therefore, these improvements are consistent with planned growth for the City. (Id.). To the extent that these improvements would accommodate growth that could not occur otherwise, they would be considered growth inducing. Since substantial growth is anticipated and planned for the City, surrounding growth accommodated by these improvements is not considered significant, and no mitigation is required. b. Potential Significant Impact: Cumulative Impacts. Whether the Project would result in or contribute to a cumulatively significant impact related to Population and Housing. Finding:Impacts related to Population and Housing are discussed in detail at Section 5.11 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not result in or contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to Population and Housing, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Implementation of the Project would contribute to the growth of the City of San Bernardino. (EIR at 5.11-11). However, the Project’s cumulative housing and population impact provides benefits for the jobs/housing ratio, regional housing goals that promote housing production, and state- mandated fair share housing programs. (Id.). The Project provides the City with more housing, which decreases the job/housing ratio by 0.01 at the projected buildout in 2035, according to SCAG projections. According to the projections in the General Plan, the Project would not change the projected buildout ratio between jobs and 55 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 827 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations housing in the City. As a result, the Project would not make a considerable contribution to cumulative growth impacts, and no mitigation is required. 12.Public Services. a. Potential Significant Impact: Police Protection. Whether the Project would result in a substantial adverse physical impact associated with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection services. Finding:Impacts related to Public Services are discussed in detail at Section 5.12 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not result in a substantial adverse physical impact associated with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities for police protection services, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Upon annexation of the Project site, the San Bernardino Police Department (“SBPD”) would provide police services to the Project site. (EIR at 5.12-9). This would expand SBPD’s service area and would likely result in an increase in calls for SBPD services. Such an increase in calls would be expected to create a need for additional police staff. (Id.). The City of San Bernardino’s development impact fee for law enforcement is $597.74 per unit for detached single-family residential units. With a total of 304 units (reduced to 215 units), $181,712.96 would be charged to the Project developer as law enforcement development impact fees. (Id.). These fees may be spent on facilities, equipment, or vehicles, and will reduce any impacts to police protection services to a less than significant level. Accordingly, no mitigation is required. b.School Services. Whether the Project would result in a substantial adversePotential Significant Impact: physical impact associated with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in 56 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 828 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for school services. Finding:Impacts related to Public Services are discussed in detail at Section 5.12 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not result in a substantial adverse physical impact associated with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities for school services, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project is estimated to generate roughly 101 additional students in the attendance area of North Verdemont Elementary School, 52 students in the attendance area of Cesar Chavez Middle School, and 59 students in the attendance area of Cajon High School. (FEIR 3-23, Table 5.12-3). There is existing unused capacity at Cesar Chavez Middle School and Cajon High School to accommodate project-generated students. However, the unused capacity at North Verdemont Elementary School is 82 students, less than Project-generated elementary school students. (Id.). The Project would create a potential need for teachers and support staff at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. In addition, the Project may create a need for additional elementary school classroom space, depending on population trends in the area. SBCUSD would charge the project Level 2 fees of $5.40 per square foot for single- family residential units. (Id.). School fees levied by school districts under SB 50 are defined as comprising full mitigation for a project’s impacts on public schools, and thus, no additional mitigation is required. c.Library Services. Whether the Project would result in a substantial adversePotential Significant Impact: physical impact associated with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for library services. Finding:Impacts related to Public Services are discussed in detail at Section 5.12 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not result in a substantial adverse physical impact associated with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities for library services, and therefore, no mitigation is required. 57 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 829 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project would include 304 single-family homes (reduced to 215 units) and would also involve the annexation of the Project site into the City of San Bernardino. (EIR at 5.12-13). Upon annexation, the Project would be in the service area of the San Bernardino Public Library, and the Dorothy Inghram Branch Library would be the closest San Bernardino Public Library (“SBPL”) facility. (Id.). The average household size in the City of San Bernardino is roughly 3.34 persons. Therefore, the Project at completion would be expected to add roughly 1,015 (711 persons at 215 units) persons to the City. The Project would thus result in an increased demand for library service in the City. (Id.). At a ratio of two volumes per resident, the Project would create a need for roughly 2,030 additional library items. (Id.). The Project-generated increase in population would also create increased need for technology such as computers at the Inghram Branch Library, and would contribute to a need for additional staffing. (Id.). The $596.63 per residential unit library facilities fee that the City would charge to the Project, would help the SBPL to meet the Project-related increase in demands for library services and reduce impacts to a less than significant level, and thus no mitigation is required. d.Cumulative Impacts. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project would result in a cumulatively significant impact to provision of public services. Finding:Impacts related to Public Services are discussed in detail at Section 5.12 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not result in a cumulatively significant impact to provision of public services, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Fire Protection Services: Cumulative impacts on fire services would occur if additional development is planned for the surrounding area, increasing the need for Fire Station 232 to provide emergency service to the area. There is potential for cumulatively significant impacts to occur, requiring additional fire service facilities and personnel. The citywide population is expected to increase from 201,049 in 2005 to 265,515 in 2035, an increase of roughly 32.1 percent. Other developments in the City would be assessed Fire Protection Development Impact Fees, as would the Project. Such fees would help to reduce cumulative impacts to fire protection. (EIR at 5.12-7). 58 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 830 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Police Services: Cumulative impacts on police services would occur if additional development is planned for the surrounding area, increasing the need for police services to the area. At General Plan buildout the City of San Bernardino, including areas now in the sphere of influence, is projected to have a population of roughly 265,515, an increase of 64,466, or 32.1 percent, over the 2005 population of 201,049. Additional developments in the City would be charged law enforcement development impact fees, as would the Project. Such fees, which may be spent on facilities, equipment, and vehicles, would help reduce cumulative impacts to police protection. (EIR at 5.12-9). School Services: If there are other residential projects in the Verdemont area in addition to the Project, the District anticipates the need for more classrooms and staffing at the elementary school level. The District expects increases in staffing at the middle school and high school levels without facilities impacts. School fees levied on related projects pursuant to SB 50 would constitute mitigation for those projects’ impacts on schools. (EIR at 5.12-12). Library Services: The City of San Bernardino estimates that the City’s population will increase to about 265,515 by 2025, including the areas now in the City’s sphere of influence, an increase of 64,466, or 32.1 percent, over the 2005 population of 201,149. The Project would account for roughly 1 percent of that population increase. Growth in the City will lead to increased demand for library services. (EIR at 5.12-13). New or expanded library facilities will be needed, in addition to increases in materials, technology, and staffing. The SBPL is funded mostly through the City’s General Fund. New developments built in the City will generate increased tax revenue, thus expanding the General Fund. Cumulative development therefore would not have a substantial adverse impact on library services, and the Project’s impacts on library services would not be cumulatively considerable. (EIR at 5.12-14). In sum, the Project’s payment of development impact fees will reduce cumulative impacts to the provision of public services to less than significant levels, and no mitigation is required. 59 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 831 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 13.Recreation. a. Potential Significant Impact: Recreational Facilities. Whether the Project would increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; or include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Finding:Impacts related to Recreation are discussed in detail in Section 5.13 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; or include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment; and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: According to the Parks, Recreation, and Trails Element of the San Bernardino General Plan, five acres of parkland and/or recreations facilities per 1,000 population is required for residential development projects. (EIR at 5.13-8). The maximum buildout of the Spring Trails Specific Plan would accommodate 304 units. Based on the City of San Bernardino’s General Land Use Element, the 2008 average household size is 3.34 persons, and the Project would therefore generate a population of approximately 1,015 residents (303 units x 3.34 = 1,015, or 711 persons at 215 units). (FEIR at 3-23). Based on the Quimby Act legislation allowing a maximum parkland dedication standard of 3 acres per 1,000 population, approximately 3.05 acres of parkland or equivalent fees or improvements would be required to serve the residents of the Project. Based on the City’s General Plan performance standard for parks and recreation facilities (5 acres per 1,000 population), the Project would generate the need for 5.01 acres of parkland. The Spring Trails Specific Plan would provide 246.3 acres of public and private parkland, open space, trails, and recreational amenities on the Project site. (Id.). More specifically, 9.0 of the 246.3 acres would be designated public and private parks: 2.0 acres of private parks and 7.0 acres of public parks. Therefore, the Project would exceed the City requirements by 3.99 acres of 60 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 832 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations parkland. Additionally, the Project responds to the City’s Parks, Recreation, and Trails Element Goals 8.1 and 8.3 by providing parks and creating a trail system that would connect to future and existing regional and City trails. (Id.). The parks and open space components would provide passive and active recreational opportunities. The exact number, precise location, configuration, type, and amount of amenities and facilities, and the size of the parks and open space areas would be established at the time of development of the tentative tract map(s) of the Project. (Id.). The proposed parks and open space acreage of the Spring Trials Specific Plan would meet and exceed the amount of parkland and/or recreation facilities defined by the Quimby Act and the more conservative performance standard outlined in the City’s General Plan. Therefore, the Project’s parks and open space components would ensure that recreational facilities would be available to new residents of the Project. (Id.). Since park needs would be met and exceeded onsite, it is not expected that the residents of the Project would, in any appreciable manner, need to use City or regionwide parks that are located offsite. Additionally, the proposed public parks, trails, and open space components would also serve residents of the existing and future surrounding communities. (Id.). Thus, impacts related to recreational facilities are less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b. Potential Significant Impact: Cumulative Impacts. Whether the Project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts to the use, construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Finding:Impacts related to Recreation are discussed in detail in Section 5.13 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to the use, construction or expansion of recreational facilities; and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Buildout of the Spring Trails Specific Plan would accommodate 304 residential units, generating a total of 1,015 residents. (FEIR at 3-23). According to the Parks, Recreation, and Trails Element, the City is currently deficient in park space and needs 787.6 acres of public parkland to provide for the projected population. The Project itself would generate a need for a total of 5.01 acres 61 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 833 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations of parkland. (Id.). However, the Project would provide 9 acres of public and private parkland and an additional 246.3 acres of open space, providing additional acreage beyond the park requirements and lessening the City’s overall parkland needs. (Id.). The Project will increase the cumulative acreage of parks in the City, improving the City's current deficiency of parkland. Additionally, the Spring Trails Specific Plan meets the goals of the Parks, Recreation, and Trails Element of the General Plan— encourage creation of a system of parks, bikeways, trails, and recreation facilities that serve residents needs and connect different neighborhoods to the City; and develop a system of open spaces, bikeways, and trails to connect individual neighborhoods into the fabric of the entire community. (EIR at 5.13-9). Thus, the Project will not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to the use, construction or expansion of recreational facilities; and, therefore, no mitigation is required. 14.Traffic Impacts. a. Potential Significant Impact: Hazards Due to Design Feature. Whether the Project would substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) or result in inadequate emergency access. Finding:Impacts related to Traffic and Circulation are discussed in detail in Section 5.14 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or result in inadequate emergency access, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed Spring Trails Specific Plan would involve the development of single-family residences with a local roadway network of cul-de-sac right-of-ways, a main loop road, and two access roads. (EIR at 5.14-44). These two access roads would connect the Project site to the existing Meyers Road, Little League Drive, and Perrin Road. The access roads and onsite circulation would follow the design standards of the FF District that allow emergency access to the site, and would not create any dangerous conditions. (Id.). Thus, impacts in this area are less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 62 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 834 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations b. Potential Significant Impact: Alternative Transportation. Whether the Project would conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks). Finding:Impacts related to Traffic and Circulation are discussed in detail in Section 5.14 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation, and therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed roadway network of the Spring Trails project includes two access roads, a primary local street, a secondary local street, and two types of cul-de-sac streets. (EIR at 5.14-44). There are no planned public transit uses for the site, but residents would have indirect access to the Omnitrans bus system (approximately two miles to bus stop). Private vehicles would most likely be the most common form of transportation used onsite since the site is not in the immediate vicinity of public transit stations. If bus or other public transit service were expanded in the area of the Project, the Project would not interfere with potential routes. (EIR at 5.14-39). The Project’s trail system would tie into area-wide trails that would help facilitate access to public transit, and would provide trails and routes for pedestrian, bicycle, and equestrian use. (EIR at 5.14-44). Thus, impacts in this area are less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 15.Utilities and Service Systems. a. Stormwater Drainage Facilities. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project would exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board; or require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Finding:Potential impacts related to Utilities and Service Systems are discussed in detail in Section 5.15 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board; or require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or 63 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 835 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects; and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The development of the Project would require the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities and infrastructure. (EIR at 5.15-21). For the most part, natural drainage patterns would be preserved with the development of the site. Major improvements would include three stormwater detention basins that would also serve as community parks. (Id.). Two of these, in the western and southern portion of the site, near Meyers Road, would serve as neighborhood parks. The other, in the south-central portion of the site, would be a dog park. The water in these detention basins would be treated and then discharged at a controlled rate into Cable Canyon Creek. (Id.). Other stormwater drainage facilities would consist of 24-inch to 96-inch reinforced concrete pipes that would be placed along the major looped road. Culverts would be constructed to maintain natural drainage patterns in each of the drainage areas (A, B, C, and D) where proposed roadways would otherwise obstruct the drainage flow. (EIR Figure 3-9). Prior to site grading, a stormwater pollution prevention plan permit must be approved by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). A water quality management plan has also been prepared for the Spring Trails Specific Plan in accordance with the Santa Ana RWQCB. This plan includes BMPs to reduce the volume, rate, and amount of stormwater runoff that must be treated and reduce the potential for urban runoff and pollutants from coming into contact with one another. (EIR at 5.15-21). Although the proposed development would necessitate the construction of new facilities and infrastructure, their construction would help to maintain the natural drainage patterns of the site and would control the stormwater runoff flow so that it would not exceed the capacities of Cable Canyon Creek leaving the site. Thus, impacts in this area are less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b.Wastewater Treatment. Potential Significant Impact:Whether the Project would result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments. 64 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 836 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding:Potential impacts related to Utilities and Service Systems are discussed in detail in Section 5.15 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments; and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project would be served by the City’s Public Works Department upon the annexation of the Project site. The design, construction, and conveyance capabilities of the sewer lines are the responsibility of the Project engineer and would be required to follow the Public Works Department sewer design policies and requirements. (EIR at 5.15-21). The proposed sewer lines would connect to the eight-inch sewer line at the intersection of Meyers Road and Little League Drive. (EIR Figure 3-12). A residential wastewater generation rate of 182 gpd per acre was used to determine the daily flow rates of the proposed Project. This rate is used for developments with residential densities of one unit per acre or less. The Sewer Capacity Analysis prepared for the Project found that the flow rate of the proposed project would reach 327,283.2 gallons per day (366.6 afy). (EIR Appendix L). The Margaret H. Chandler Water Reclamation Plant (“WRP”) has a projected wastewater flow of 35,828 afy in 2015 (31.985 mgd). (EIR at 5.15-22). With a capacity of 33 mgd, the plant would have remaining capacity for 1.015 mgd. The Project’s expected wastewater flow of 327,283.2 gpd is within the projected flow capacity of the WRP near opening year 2013 (35,828 afy in 2015). The onsite sewer lines would be eight inches in diameter, designed to accommodate a flow rate of 1.354 cubic feet per second (cfs) (203 gpm). The actual onsite flow would be 0.5064 cfs. (Id.). The Sewer Capacity Study assessed the existing conditions of the sewer system that would be used by the Project and the capacity that would be required for proposed sewer lines. The report used the City of San Bernardino Public Works Sewer Policy and Procedures design criteria for sanitary sewers based on City sewer buildout conditions in year 2020. The City’s Sewer Master Plan is based on City buildout in 2020. (Id.). The analysis of the existing sewer system found that four locations had a pipe flow over that of the design flow for the pipe section. These four locations were still below the full flow capacity of the sewer pipe sections. (Id.). Since all pipeline sections are still within the full flow capacity, upgrades are not required. The existing 65 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 837 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations sewer system would be able to accommodate the wastewater flow from the Project. However, the slope of the proposed pipeline in Verdemont Drive is not known. Depending on this slope, the pipeline would be either 8 or 10 inches in diameter. If a 10-inch pipeline is used, the existing pipeline at Little League Drive would need to be upgraded from 8 to 10 inches, since it is not recommended to have a 10-inch pipeline upstream of an 8-inch pipeline. (Id.). The Project would require the construction of new pipelines on the Project site, most likely of 8- inch diameter, and potentially an upgrade of the existing pipeline at Little League Drive. The construction of new pipelines and pipeline improvements is designed within the road right-of-ways. (Id.). Potential environmental impacts associated with these improvements were addressed in the EIR in conjunction with the assessment of the development footprint, and found to be less than significant. Accordingly, no mitigation is required. c. Potential Significant Impact: Landfill Capacity. Whether the Project would be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs; or fail to comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Finding:Potential impacts related to Utilities and Service Systems are discussed in detail in Section 5.15 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project would not be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs; or fail to comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste; and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed Spring Trails specific plan involves 304 residential units (reduced to 215 units) that would generate solid waste to be disposed at Mid-Valley and/or San Timoteo landfills. (EIR at 5.15-26). The solid waste generated by each residential unit can be estimated at 12.23 pounds of household waste per dwelling unit per day. (Id.). Based on this estimation, the Project would generate approximately 1,357,040 lbs/year (678 tons of solid waste per year, or 1.85 tons per day). San Timoteo Landfill can receive a maximum of 1,000 tons per day until 2016. (Id.). Since this closure date is not long after the buildout of the Project, the majority of the waste from the Project would 66 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 838 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations go to the Mid-Valley landfill, which has a closure date of 2033. (Id.). The Mid-Valley Landfill can receive up to 7,500 tons of waste per day, and the average daily waste flow is 2,790 tons. (Id.). The daily waste flow plus the waste flow of the Project totals 2,791.88 tons per day, which would be under the permitted daily capacity of the landfill. (Id.). The County and City of San Bernardino have recycling programs and incentives to reduce the amount of solid waste being transported to landfills. The waste reduction and pollution prevention programs of the City help both residents and businesses reduce waste and find recycling solutions. The City offers pick-up services for waste, green waste, and recycling for residents and businesses. Impacts related to solid waste generation would be less than significant. (Id.). The City of San Bernardino was in compliance with AB 939 in 2005 and 2006 based on the 50 percent waste diversion rate. (EIR Table 5.15-17). In 2007 and 2008, San Bernardino did not meet the per capita disposal rate targets, but these numbers do not necessarily indicate noncompliance. (See EIR Table 5.15-18). The figures must be reviewed and approved by the board before they are used to determine the City’s compliance with AB 939 (and SB 1016). These figures have not yet been approved by the board, and the effect Spring Trails would have on the City’s ability to meet its diversion targets is speculative. (EIR at 5.15-26). In worst-case conditions, the Project would decrease the amount of waste being diverted from landfills, and lessen the City’s likelihood of compliance with AB 939. Residents living in Spring Trails would participate in City-sponsored waste and recycling collection programs. (Id.). Residential waste flow generated during the operation of the Project would have to be incorporated into the City’s calculations on how to meet the 50 percent diversion goal. Although it would increase the amount of waste that would need to be disposed of by the City, this increase is not expected to cause significant impacts. (Id.). Construction material waste must also be reported to CalRecycle to indicate compliance with AB 939. Construction material waste would also need to be incorporated into the City’s calculations to meet the 50 percent diversion goal; however, since there would not be demolition of existing structures involved with the construction activities, there would not be a substantial amount of waste to be discarded. (EIR at 5.15-27). In sum, 67 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 839 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the Project would be adequately served by the Mid-Valley and San Timoteo Sanitary landfills and would comply with AB 939, and no mitigation is required. d. Potential Significant Impact: Cumulative Impacts. Whether the Project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts to Utilities and Service Systems. Finding:Potential impacts related to Utilities and Service Systems are discussed in detail in Section 5.15 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to Utilities and Service Systems; and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: Stormwater/Wastewater: Cumulative impacts caused by the need to construct additional stormwater conveyance infrastructure could occur if Spring Trails were to use the same infrastructure as other developments. (EIR at 5.15-23). The Spring Trails Project would discharge its treated stormwater into Cable Canyon Creek at a controlled rate. (Id.). Impacts could occur if development north of or immediately adjacent to Spring Trails contributed stormwater runoff to the same drainage system as Spring Trails. Since Spring Trails is immediately surrounded by unincorporated San Bernardino County or San Bernardino National Forest, it is unlikely that development would occur in these areas. (Id.). Additionally, any future developments would be required to ensure that there would not be any net peak increase in stormwater flow to the existing infrastructure. There would not be any cumulatively significant impacts related to the construction of stormwater facilities. (Id.). The proposed Spring Trails Specific Plan would generate 63 afy of wastewater. This represents 0.18 percent of the total wastewater flow capacity of the WRP (35,828 afy). (Id.). In combination with growth in the area, the Project would not have cumulatively significant impacts on wastewater infrastructure. The sewer study prepared for this report analyzed the Project’s contribution to projected flow rates of the existing sewer system in 2020. The projected flow rates were acquired from the City’s Sewer Master Plan for year 2020 and incorporates projected growth in the service area. (Id.). Since the Project’s wastewater flow would not exceed the full capacity flows of the existing sewer system as projected in 2020, there would not be any cumulative 68 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 840 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations impacts related to the need for additional sewer system improvements. (Id.). Solid waste: Solid waste planning in San Bernardino County is guided by the San Bernardino County Solid Waste Management Plan, which directs the actions of the San Bernardino County Solid Waste Advisory Committee. (EIR at 5.15-27). The City of San Bernardino has a representative on this committee. The need for any additional landfills or transfer stations in the future must be incorporated into the solid waste management plan. The EIR for the San Bernardino General Plan Update estimates that, at buildout, the City would be generating 2,628 tons of solid waste per day (after diversion). (Id.). The Mid-Valley landfill can receive up to 7,500 tons of solid waste per day through its closure date in 2033. Over 70 jurisdictions send solid waste to this landfill, and the total daily disposal averages 2,790 tons. (Id.). Between 2005 and 2007, total tons disposed per year decreased from 855,135 to 762,729 tons. When the Project’s disposal rate (1.89 tons per day) is included with the buildout disposal rate for the City (2,628 tons per day), the total is 2,629.89 tons per day, which is more than the current daily average for the landfill but less than the maximum capacity. (Id.). The proposed Project would not significantly contribute to the projected solid waste flow from the City of San Bernardino or to the maximum daily permitted disposal rate for the Mid-Valley landfill, and thus, no mitigation is required. 16.Greenhouse Gas Emissions. a. Potential Significant Impact: Conflict with Applicable Plan. Whether the Project would conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Finding:Potential impacts from Greenhouse Gas Emissions are discussed in detail in Section 5.16 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project would not conflict with the California Air Resources Board’s (“CARB”) Scoping Plan; and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The CARB Scoping Plan identifies that reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels means “cutting approximately 30 percent from business-as-usual emissions levels 69 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 841 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations projected for 2020, or about 15 percent from today’s levels.” (EIR at 5.16-18). On a per capita basis, that means reducing our annual emissions of 14 tons of CO2e (13 MTons) for every man, woman, and child in California to about 10 tons (9 MTons) per person by 2020.”A 30 percent per capita reduction, or approximately 4 MTons less GHG emissions per person, is necessary to achieve the emissions reduction of the Scoping Plan. (Id.). Traffic trips associated with new and redevelopment projects contribute indirect emissions of air pollutants. (Id.). The most effective way to reduce emissions is through a substantial reduction in vehicle trips and trip lengths. While local and regional governments cannot directly regulate vehicles and vehicle emissions, they can implement land use regulations and strategies to reduce VMT. (Id.). Such strategies can include better integration of land use and transportation planning to reduce trip lengths between residential areas to employment centers and amenities, and to promote greater public transit use and alternative modes of transportation. (Id.). Strategies to implement such land use policy can either be incentive based, such as compliance with the SCS, or penalty based, such as indirect source review. Regional strategies include the Sustainable Communities Strategy (“SCS”) for the SCAG region, and the Compass Blueprint 2% Strategy. (EIR at 5.16-19). Transportation contributes a large percentage of the state’s GHG emissions and research shows that increasing a community’s or development’s density and accessibility to job centers are the two most significant factors for reducing VMT through design. (Id.). Consistency with the SCS for the SCAG region would reduce VMT and trips within the region as a whole. Regional GHG emissions reduction targets and the SCS have not yet been established for the SCAG region. According to the 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP), SCAG's Land Use and Housing Action Plan can be expected to result in a 10 percent reduction in VMT in 2035 when compared to current trends. In general, VMT serves as a proxy for jobs/housing balance, urban design, transit accessibility, and other urban form issues. (Id.). The Compass Blueprint is a component of the Land Use and Housing element of the 2008 RCP in achieving sustainable land uses and policies. The framework of the Compass Blueprint strategy 70 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 842 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations focuses on four areas in achieving sustainable development: mobility, livability, prosperity, and sustainability. (Id.). Key aspects of the Compass Blueprint in reducing VMT include developing housing near regional employment centers and amenities and encouraging transit- oriented development. The Project would be consistent with one aspect of the mobility element of the Compass Blueprint by locating residential development near an employment center (i.e., the City of San Bernardino). (Id.). However, the Project is not a mixed-use development; it is a proposed master planned single-family residential development. Additionally, it would not be in proximity to amenities, as the majority of amenities would be approximately four miles or more from the Project site, nor would it be near readily accessible public transit, as the nearest transit stop would be approximately over a mile to the east. (Id.). Energy use and related activities for buildings is the second largest contributor to California’s GHG emissions. (Id.). Energy efficiency and conservation measures are identified as a best performance standard for development projects. In general, there are two strategies for reducing GHG emissions from the Electricity sector: 1) reducing the amount of energy consumed; and 2) reducing the GHG emissions resulting from electricity production. (Id.). The Project would have little control over the latter, and the CEC has determined that the success of reducing GHG emissions from electricity production depends largely on the success of California’s renewable-energy and energy- efficiency programs. Consequently, GHG emissions reductions can be achieved through the design and construction of new green buildings, because green buildings offer a comprehensive approach to reducing GHG emissions across multiple sectors (Energy Use, Water, Waste, and Transportation). (Id.). Water use also requires significant amounts of energy. Approximately one- fifth of the electricity and a third of the non–power plant natural gas consumed in the state are associated with water use. Measures to increase water use efficiency and reduce water demand would reduce electricity demand from the Water sector, therefore reducing GHG emissions. (Id.). The California Water Resources Control Board has prepared a draft “20X2020” Water Conservation Plan that outlines the state’s strategies to achieve a 20 percent 71 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 843 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations reduction in per capita urban water use statewide by 2020. (EIR at 5.16-20). The Scoping Plan considers using the green building framework as a mechanism that enables GHG reductions in other sectors. In July 2008, the California Building Standards Commission adopted the Green Building Standards Code that includes mandatory features for residential structures and voluntary standards for nonresidential structures. (Id.). As of January 1, 2010, all new structures would be constructed to achieve the performance standards of the 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards, which are approximately 15 percent more energy efficient than the 2005 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. (Id.). The new standards also require improvements in water efficiency for plumbing fixtures and a target of 50 percent landscape water conservation reduction. While the current code is voluntary for nonresidential structures, the Commission is in the process of developing mandatory provisions in the 2010 edition of the California Green Building Standards Code. Transportation, energy efficiency, and water reductions measures implemented by the state as outlined in CARB’s Scoping Plan would reduce Project-related GHG emissions. (Id.). Implementation of transportation, water, and energy efficiency measures of CARB’s Scoping Plan would reduce emissions by 39 percent, or 3,863 MTons of GHG in year 2020 from BAU. (EIR Table 5.16-7). The Project would be consistent with the statewide emissions reduction strategies outlined in the Scoping Plan. (Id.). Therefore, impacts associated with consistency with plans to reduce GHG emissions are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 17.Forest Resources. a. Potential Significant Impact: Conflict with Applicable Plan. Whether the Project would conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)). Finding:Potential impacts from the Project on Forest Resources are discussed in detail in Section 5.17 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project site is not considered timberland or 72 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 844 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations zoned timber production. Although resources within the Project site qualify as forest land per California Resources Code Section 12220 would be impacted by Project implementation, this impact is less than significant and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Finding: The drainages in the northern (Cable Creek) and southern portions (Meyers Creek) of the Project site contain native tree species that exhibit the characteristics of forest lands. Implementation of the Project would develop single-family residences and result in the removal of 220 native species trees on the project site. Therefore, the Project could conflict with Project site’s ability to continue to be designated as forest land. (EIR at 5.17-4). The Project site was previously been used for agriculture, and a previous landowner grew eucalyptus trees to be used as windrows for crop protection, with a secondary use as firewood. (Id.). Despite the presence of the eucalyptus trees, the site does not include timberland as defined by PRC Section 4526, which would require the project site to be capable of growing “a crop of trees of any commercial species used to produce lumber and other forest products.” (Id.). Per Section 895.1 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (“CCR”), “commercial species” is defined as “those species found in group A and those in group B that are found on lands where the species in group A are now growing naturally or have grown naturally in the recorded past.” (EIR at 5.17-4). The commercial species list for the Southern Forest District is shown at EIR Table 5.17-1. Although eucalyptus trees are included in group B, the Project site does not have any naturally occurring trees of species that are included in group A. (EIR Table 5.3-3). Therefore, per this definition, the Project site does not meet the definition of timberland. Implementation of the Project would not conflict with or cause a rezoning of any designated timberland areas. (EIR at 5.17-5). The Project site is in the Verdemont community of unincorporated San Bernardino County and in the City of San Bernardino’s sphere of influence (“SOI”). (Id.). The Project site is not currently zoned for timberland production per CPRC 51104. The site is currently subject to County of San Bernardino’s General Plan and Zoning Code. As shown in Figure 4.6 of the County’s General Plan, “Land Use Designations,” the northern portion of the site, approximately 160 acres, is designated as private unincorporated land within the San Bernardino National 73 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 845 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Forest. (Id.). The southern portion of the site, approximately 190.6 acres, is designated Rural Living (RL- 5), which allows up to one dwelling unit per five acres. Since the Project site is within the City of San Bernardino’s SOI, the entire project site is currently prezoned by the City as Residential Estate (RE), allowing one dwelling unit per acre. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not conflict with or cause a rezoning of any timberland production zone. (Id.). Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. B.Potentially Significant Impacts Which Can Be Mitigated Below a Level of Significance and Mitigation Measures. 1.Biological Resources. a. Candidate, Sensitive or Special Status Species. Potential Significant Impact:The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Finding:Impacts related to Biological Resources are discussed in detail at Section 5.3 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that development of the proposed Project would involve the loss or modification of approximately 265.2 acres of natural habitat and the wildlife species. These activities could potentially impact special stats plant and animal species, critical habitat designated by the Fish and Wildlife Service; and indirect impacts to sensitive plant and animal habitats could also occur. However, these impacts can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through implementation of Mitigation Measures 3-1 to 3-5 and 3-13. These Mitigation Measures are adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 3-1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, preconstruction surveys within the proposed impact areas for Plummer ’s mariposa lily shall be conducted in the appropriate blooming period by a qualified biologist. The appropriate blooming period is defined as occurring within the months of April, May, and June, or as indicated by positive verification of blooming at a documented reference location. Surveys must only be conducted during a year of at least average precipitation, as determined by official precipitation records. The surveys should positively identify and quantify all individuals on or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed impact areas. Any individuals confirmed within the project 74 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 846 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations impact area shall be considered for possible salvage and relocation into suitable receptor sites located onsite within preserved areas, if feasible. Any individuals confirmed in the immediate vicinity of a proposed impact area shall be flagged and appropriately fenced off from construction zones to prevent inadvertent impacts. Individuals confirmed within areas proposed for preservation onsite shall be properly recorded and avoided during any revegetation or other efforts anticipated in the long-term during project operation. All observations shall be accurately reported to the California Natural Diversity Database, the California Native Plant Survey, the Consortium of California Herbarium, and/or other herbarium or sensitive species databases as determined by the qualified biologist. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 3-2 To mitigate for impacts to unoccupied critical habitat of the federally endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat, the project applicant shall acquire offsite permanent mitigation lands of like habitat quality as determined by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) during the Section 7 consultation process. Mitigation lands must be acquired prior to the issuance of grading permits, and shall incorporate appropriate long-term management provisions such as deed restrictions, endowments, and/or other management mechanisms to provide for the long-term conservation of the habitat. Potential properties include, but are not limited to, those managed by San Bernardino County Special Districts located in the Glen Helen, Rialto, and Rancho Cucamonga areas. Mitigation lands shall be acquired at a replacement ratio of 1:1 (one acre replaced for every one acre impacted). This measure does not preclude the imposition of additional mitigation requirements that may be initiated by the USFWS during the Section 7 consultation process. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 3-3 To mitigate for potential impacts to hydrological processes and subsequent degradation of habitat for the federally endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat and other sensitive species, all roadway crossings or other improvements proposed within critical habitat for the species shall be designed in such a manner as to not substantially alter the natural flow regimes through impacted sensitive habitat areas. These designs shall include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, the installation of appropriate culverts and stream crossings that allow for natural flow and uninhibited downstream hydrological processes. Design of these improvements shall be undertaken in consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service and other responsible agencies. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of grading permits. 3-4 Any hiking and equestrian trails or other facilities developed within Cable Creek or other riparian areas on the site shall be designed to comply with provisions in the General Plan. These requirements shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: 1) no ground disturbance may take place within 50 feet of the ordinary high-water mark of the associated stream channel; 2) erosion, sedimentation, and runoff from the proposed improvements must be minimized by the implementation of appropriate best management practices, the installation of appropriate runoff diversions, and/or the planting of native vegetation; 3) Vegetation removal will be minimized to the maximum extent possible; and 75 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 847 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 4) appropriate signage shall be installed in at least five locations alongside these facilities to educate users as to the importance of riparian ecosystems, the species that rely upon them, and the importance of avoiding unnecessary impacts and disturbance. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. [This measure also provides mitigation for Impact 5.3-4 as related to impacts to wildlife corridors. See Mitigation Measure 3-9] 3-5 The applicant shall prepare a signage and a buyer awareness program to be implemented to inform homeowners of the proximity to sensitive wildlife areas. The purpose of this program shall be to (1) prevent wildlife from being attracted to the housing development and (2) prevent household pets from preying on and harassing the local sensitive species. Materials and literature provided to the residents shall address the implications and dangers of living adjacent to natural open space areas. To prevent wildlife from being attracted to the project site, the materials shall provide information on homeowner ’s benefits and responsibilities associated with living close to natural wildlife habitats. Specific responsibilities of homeowners shall be described in these materials and be included in the Homeowners Association (HOA) Covenants, Codes, & Restrictions (CC&R). These measures shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:  The storage and disposal of ALL food or refuse that is edible by or attractive to wildlife shall be placed in Wildlife-Resistant Refuse Enclosures and Containers. These containers shall meet applicable standards of testing by the Living With Wildlife Foundation and be bear resistant for 60 minutes so long as they are able to meet the City of San Bernardino’s Refuse and Recycling Division’s restrictions for pick-up and onsite sizing. Examples of Wildlife- Resistant Refuse Enclosures and Containers are provided by the Living with Wildlife Foundation (http://www.lwwf.org/).  The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of San Bernardino Refuse and Recycling Division to ensure all refuse facilities conform to their sizing and pick-up requirements. All refuse containers shall be designed to be consistent with the City of San Bernardino Refuse and Recycling Division restrictions.  With the exception of birdfeeders, no person shall intentionally feed or knowingly leave or store any refuse, food product, pet food, or other product edible by wildlife on any premises in a manner which would constitute a lure, attraction, or enticement of wildlife on property within the development  Birdfeeders must be suspended on a cable or other device so as to be inaccessible to bears and other wildlife, and the area below the feeders must be kept free from seed debris. If a wild animal gains access to a birdfeeder, the condition allowing access must be corrected or the birdfeeder removed. 76 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 848 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations  To limit the amount of time refuse is on the curb, trash should be set out and brought back inside between specified hours on pick-up day (to be detailed in the proposed or future HOA CC&Rs). To prevent the disturbance of wildlife (and sensitive species) by domestic pets, the program shall inform residents of the impacts their pets have on local animals. Cat- owners shall be informed of measures to keep their pets within their property boundaries and dog-owners shall keep their dogs on a leash while outside (except within designated dog parks). These measures would also serve to lessen the likelihood of domestic pets being preyed upon by wild predators. The buyer awareness materials will be included in a sales disclosure statement and in the Homeowners Association (HOA) CC&Rs. A copy of the buyer awareness materials shall be approved by the Community Development Director and available to residents upon request. 3-13 Significant tree resources that are removed from the site during project development shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio or at the exchange ratios specific below. Significant tree resources are defined as any native or nonnative ornamental tree—excluding species of the Eucalyptus genus—that is healthy, structurally sound, and over 20 feet in height. For California black walnut (Juglans californica var. californica), all specimens of the species shall be regarded as significant, regardless of size or height. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a certified arborist shall conduct an inventory of all significant trees within the development footprint. This inventory shall be used to determine the number and types of significant trees that will be impacted and the subsequent replacement quantities. The number of replacement trees shall be, at a minimum, 220 trees. Should the aforementioned inventory determine that a greater number of significant trees will be impacted, then that quantity shall be used in determining replacement quantities. For purposes of replacement ratios, the following exchange ratios shall be used: 1) one 36-inch box tree is equivalent to one replacement tree; 2) five 15-gallon trees are equivalent to one replacement tree; 3) 10 five-gallon trees are equivalent to one replacement tree; and 4) 15 one-gallon trees are equivalent to one replacement tree. During the development of the project, the project applicant shall incorporate the recommendations as set forth in the project arborist report (Integrated Urban Forestry 1998). A certified arborist shall be retained at the developer’s expense to oversee the implementation of these requirements and to specify other requirements as deemed appropriate. The measures to be followed include, but are not limited to, specified protocols for the following: 1) the removal of nonnative trees from the site; 2) the removal and transplantation, when feasible, of structurally sound and healthy native trees to other areas of the project site; 3) the installation of tree protection barriers on all trees to be preserved that are within the reach of vehicles and equipment; 4) tree protection training of construction personnel by a certified arborist; 5) irrigation of trees where the natural water supply is interrupted or diminished or where protected trees may require additional water to endure construction-induced stresses; 6) subsequent replacement of any trees that are damaged or have not survived transplantation and 77 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 849 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations relocation; and 7) implementation of the tree replacement plan, as outlined in the first paragraph of this measure. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Facts in Support of the Finding: Approximately 100 to 300 Plummer’s mariposa lily plants and approximately 350 to 600 individual California black walnut trees of varying ages would be impacted by Project development. Both are listed as sensitive by the California Native Plant Society (“CNPS”). Impacts to USFWS- designated critical habitat for San Bernardino kangaroo rat (“SBKR”) would also occur, as would impacts to Los Angeles pocket mouse. Potential impacts to least Bell’s vireo (“LBV”) and southwestern willow flycatcher (“SWF”) are also present. (EIR at 5.3-45). No plant species listed as either threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (“FESA”) or the California Endangered Species Act (“CESA”) is known to occur on the Project site. This finding is based on numerous focused surveys and habitat assessments conducted on the site since 1998. Since no federal- or state-listed species occurs on the site, there would be no impact to these species from Project development. (Id.). Although numerous biological inventories have been conducted on the Project site over the past ten years and the site’s biological resources values have been well established, the applicant is aware that habitat assessments and focused surveys need to be updated. As such, pre-clearance surveys will be conducted for each of the federally and state listed species that have a potential to occur onsite, including sensitive plant surveys following the CDFG’s November 2009 guidance for special status native plant populations and natural communities. Special Status Plant Species: Two plant species listed as sensitive by the CNPS have been documented to occur on the Project site. (EIR at 5.3-45). Plummer’s mariposa lily has been previously observed within unconfirmed areas of the Project site during at least two surveys. There is suitable habitat on the site and it can be assumed that the species is present. It is not known, however, if the recorded occurrences were in an area of the site that is proposed for development. (EIR at 5.3-46). Potential impacts to this non-listed CNPS List 1B.2 species is not anticipated to be significant due to the relative abundance of this species on a regional scale. According to the CNPS listing guidelines, this species is known from 21 to 80 occurrences throughout 78 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 850 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations its range, interpreted as anywhere between 3,000 to 10,000 individuals, or 10,000 to 50,000 occupied acres. The Project would result in the removal of an estimated 100 to 300 individuals. This represents a small portion of the total known population and any impacts would not jeopardize the existence of this species or elevate its sensitivity or listing status under the CNPS, California Natural Diversity Database (“CNDDB”), global and state heritage rankings, the FESA, or CESA. (Id.). Despite the fact that Plummer’s mariposa lily is not specifically protected under state law, mitigation imposed during the Section 1602 permitting process would likely be required at some level for this species. For this reason, Mitigation Measure 3-1 will be incorporated to identify specimens that are located within the Project impact area. These specimens should be avoided or relocated as feasible. Adherence to these requirements would lessen the Project’s impact in this regard to less than significant levels. (Id.). California black walnut is also present on the site, and potential impacts to this nonlisted CNPS List 4.2 species are not anticipated to be significant due to the relative abundance of this species on a regional scale. (Id.). According to the CNPS listing guidelines, this species is known from at least 21 to 80 occurrences throughout its range, which is interpreted as anywhere between 3,000 to 10,000 individuals that are known, or 10,000 to 50,000 occupied acres. The Project would result in the removal of approximately 350 to 600 individuals of varying ages. This represents a small portion of the total known population. (Id.). These impacts would not jeopardize the existence of this species or elevate its sensitivity or status under the CNPS, CNDDB global and state heritage rankings, the FESA, or CESA. While California black walnut is not specifically protected under state law, mitigation initiated during the Section 1602 permitting process would likely be required at some level for this species. For this reason, Mitigation Measure 3-13 is required to salvage and relocate healthy specimens, and/or to plant new specimens within areas to be preserved onsite, which would lessen the Project’s impact in this regard to less than significant levels. Special Status Wildlife Species: Numerous small mammal trapping sessions have been conducted on the Project site over the last 11 years, but none of the survey efforts have 79 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 851 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations revealed the presence of any federal- or state-listed small mammal species. (Id.). Even though portions of the site are within designated critical habitat for SBKR, it appears that the species is absent from the site. This is likely due to the separation of the site from existing SBKR populations by the I-215 freeway, other roadways, a railroad, and residential and commercial development. The Riverside Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (“RAFSS”) habitat on the site is suitable for SBKR, but there appears to be lack of effective linkage with adjacent populations. Regardless, since portions of the site are within designated critical habitat for the species, consultation with the USFWS under Section 7 of FESA would be required. Mitigation requirements derived from this consultation would serve to lessen the Project’s potential impacts to SBKR. (Id.). In anticipation of those agency requirements, Mitigation Measures 3-2 and 3-3 are required to reduce the Project’s impacts in this regard to less than significant levels, by requiring the adoption of BMPs to avoid direct and indirect impacts to remaining habitat areas, and also imposes specific design requirements to lessen additional impacts to offsite areas and to provide for the continued movement of animals through the area. Mitigation Measure 3-1 also requires the purchase and permanent preservation of offsite mitigation lands and/or the payment of in-lieu fees, and that the applicant demonstrate that suitable mitigation lands have been identified and are available for acquisition. (EIR at 5.3-47). Mitigation ratios for offsite habitat purchases are typically based on a number of factors, including the quality of the habitat to be replaced and whether or not the impacted area is actually occupied by the species in question. In the case of this Project, the onsite RAFSS habitat that would support SBKR is of good quality, but has been determined through repeated surveys to not be occupied by SBKR. Accordingly, the prescribed mitigation for the loss of unoccupied SBKR critical habitat for this project is set at a ratio 1:1 (one acre replaced for every one acre impacted). The Project applicant has identified several hundred acres of potential mitigation lands containing suitable RAFSS habitat along the alluvial fans of the San Bernardino Mountains. These lands are available for purchase and dedication to an appropriate conservation management organization.This dedication and management would ensure the long-term conservation status of this sensitive habitat type in the San Bernardino Valley. It can therefore be concluded that the prescribed 80 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 852 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations mitigation is feasible, and would mitigate the Project’s impacts in this regard to less than significant levels. (Id.). Two California Species of Special Concern (“SSCs”) are known to occur on the Project site. Both San Diego pocket mouse and Los Angeles pocket mouse have been captured during each of the survey efforts on the site. Potential impacts to San Diego pocket mouse are not typically considered significant under CEQA because this species is widespread and abundant on a local and regional level. (Id.). Impacts to Los Angeles pocket mouse, however, could be considered potentially significant since the preferred habitat of the species is narrow and the species is not known to be locally or regionally abundant. The status of SSC, however, does not afford any specific legal protections, and therefore this impact can be considered less than significant. Nevertheless, the potential adverse impact to Los Angeles pocket mouse could be of concern to regulatory agencies such as CDFG. (Id.). It is likely that CDFG would impose some level of mitigation during the Section 1602 permitting process to account for this impact. Because Los Angeles pocket mouse generally occurs in the same area as the SBKR’s designated critical habitat, mitigation required by the USFWS during the Section 7 process and as discussed in the paragraphs above would serve as mitigation for Los Angeles pocket mouse as well. For that reason, mitigation specific to Los Angeles pocket mouse is not recommended. Rather, it is recommended that Mitigation Measures 3-2 and 3-3 for SBKR be implemented in order to lessen the Project’s impact to both SBKR and Los Angeles pocket mouse to less than significant levels. (Id.). Birds: Based on repeated negative findings for coastal California gnatcatcher (“CAGN”) during numerous survey efforts, as well as the site’s recent exclusion from designated critical habitat, it is reasonable to assume that the species does not occur upon the Project site. (Id.). The riparian areas within Cable Creek provide suitable habitat for the SWF, though focused surveys conducted in 2007 returned negative findings. However, LBV was observed along Cable Creek in 2007. It is therefore possible that the species could be present farther east of this location within Cable Creek. (EIR at 5.3-48). Individual Take Permits (“ITPs”) will be acquired to offset potential impacts to LBV, which is a federally and state listed species. Separate 81 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 853 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations ITPs will be acquired from CDFG, through a 2081 ITP application, and from USFWS, through a Section 7 consultation. Mitigation under these permits will be adequately funded and will ensure that the Project does not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Direct development of the riparian areas of Cable Creek is not proposed as part of the Project’s development. No homes or other structures would be located within the riparian areas that would be most likely to contain LBV and SWF. However, the ITP will also provide BMPs to avoid indirect impacts to the species. An evaluation of the adequacy of the existing CEQA documentation to cover any unanticipated minimization and mitigation measures included in the final ITPs will be made when the permits are issued. If additional CEQA documentation is required for review by CDFG to comply with its duties as a Responsible Agency under CEQA, the subsequent documentation will be prepared at that time. In addition, the hiking/equestrian trail that is planned for this area could impact LBV and SWF if they are present and if the trail is not designed thoughtfully with the aim of avoiding impacts to these species. (Id.). For that reason, Mitigation Measure 3-4 will be incorporated to assure that the trail’s design, construction, and use would not impact the creek bottom in a manner that could create a significant impact to these species. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3-4 would reduce the level of this potentially significant impact to less than significant levels. (Id.). Reptiles and Amphibians: No federal- or state-listed reptile species has ever been observed on the Project site, and none is expected to occur. (Id.). With regard to amphibians, habitat assessments conducted over the last 11 years have concluded that marginally suitable habitat for arroyo southwestern toad and mountain yellow-legged frog is present along Cable Creek. Neither of these species, however, has been detected during both general habitat assessment surveys or focused surveys conducted in the area. (Id.). Based on these findings, it is likely that neither species is present on the Project site. Furthermore, direct development of the riparian stretches of Cable Creek is not proposed as part of the Project’s development. Mitigation Measure 3-4 for the proposed hiking/equestrian trail would also lessen the Project’s potential impacts in this regard to less than significant levels. (Id.). 82 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 854 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Indirect Impacts to Special Status Species: Since the Project site would be surrounded on three sides by existing wild areas that are known to provide suitable habitat for a number of animal species, it can be assumed that wild animals would continue to be present in these adjacent wild areas following Project development. (Id.). These animals would come into contact with the proposed development at the wildland-urban interface (“WUI”) and in surrounding areas. The introduction of domestic animals would also potentially impact sensitive wildlife species in the area, as well as more common wildlife species. Domestic cats, for instance, are particularly adept at preying on wild animals such as birds, small mammals, and reptiles. Domestic cats tend to be several times as abundant in WUI areas as all other mid-sized wild predators combined, including bobcats and foxes. In some contexts, cat predation may supersede habitat loss as a primary threat to birds’ survival. Other domestic animals, such as unrestrained dogs, can harass wildlife and can thus deny wild animals from using otherwise suitable habitat. (EIR at 5.3-49). However, implementation of Mitigation Measure 3-5 will reduce this potentially significant impact to less than significant levels. b. Potential Significant Impact: Riparian Plant or Other Sensitive Natural Communities. The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could have a substantial adverse effect on a riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Finding:Impacts related to Biological Resources are discussed in detail at Section 5.3 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that development of the Project would result in impacts to six riparian plant communities totaling 26.4 acres. Also, 168.4 acres of Riversidean sage scrub, a sensitive nonriparian plant community, would be impacted, as well as portions of the Project site within USFWS-designated habitat for the SBKR. This impact is potentially significant, but can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through implementation of Mitigation Measures 3-6 to 3-8. These Mitigation Measures are adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 83 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 855 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 3-6 To mitigate impacts to 168.4 acres of Riversidean sage scrub (RSS) and 26.4 acres of riparian plant communities, the project applicant shall do one of the following, or a combination thereof, prior to the issuance of grading permits: 1) acquire offsite permanent mitigation lands of like habitat as determined by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG); and/or 2) pay appropriate in-lieu fees to an appropriate permanent mitigation land bank as determined by CDFG. Mitigation lands must be acquired prior to the issuance of grading permits, and shall incorporate appropriate long-term management provisions, such as deed restrictions, endowments, and/or other management mechanisms to provide for the long-term conservation of the habitat. Potential properties include, but are not limited to, those managed by San Bernardino County Special Districts located in the Glen Helen, Rialto, and Rancho Cucamonga areas. Mitigation lands for riparian habitat shall be acquired at a replacement ratio of 1:1 (one acre replaced for every one acre impacted). Mitigation lands for RSS shall be acquired at a replacement ration of 1:3 (one acre replaced for every three acres impacted). This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 3-7 All real property sold within the development shall contain within the real estate contract appropriate Covenants, Codes, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) to require only the use of approved plants on any and all parcels within the development. Approved plants are defined as those listed in the Fire Protection Plan (Firesafe Planning Solutions 2008) and incorporated into the Spring Trails Specific Plan. All plants classified as “invasive” or “noxious” by the US Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) shall be specifically prohibited from use in any part of the development, unless specifically authorized within the Fire Protection Plan or the Specific Plan. Enforcement shall be instituted through the project’s Homeowner ’s Association (HOA) and specific enforcement measures shall be provided within the HOA’s charter. Enforcement measures may include, but not necessarily be limited to, the imposition of fines, liens, property- owner reimbursed removal of unauthorized plants, and/or other mechanisms. This measure must be implemented prior to the sale of the first residential lot and shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 3-8 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer or his designee shall submit to the City a noxious weed control plan prepared by a qualified specialist that shall be implemented during construction of the project. The plan shall contain specific measures to be adopted to lessen or eliminate the inadvertent introduction of noxious weeds onto the site or surrounding areas. At a minimum, the plan shall incorporate each of the following requirements: 1) all construction equipment used on the site shall be thoroughly washed prior to transport to the project site; 2) cleaning and washing of equipment includes washing and/or steam cleaning of tires, undercarriages, frames, and other parts of the equipment where mud, dirt, and other debris could be located; 3) offsite cleaning areas shall be clearly identified; and 4) straw bales and other erosion control products shall be certified as “weed free”. The plan shall be reviewed by a qualified third party with expertise in the field of noxious weed control. Other control measures may be added by that specialist as deemed appropriate. Following approval of the plan, the plan shall be implemented throughout the construction phase of the project and overseen by a 84 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 856 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations qualified specialist at monthly intervals. During monitoring, the specialist shall have the authority to require corrective measures to assure the success of the plan. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project would result in impacts to Riversidean Sage Scrub (RSS) and six riparian plant communities. The Project could also have indirect impacts on surrounding undeveloped lands. Portions of the site are located within USFWS-designated critical habitat for the SBKR. (EIR at 5.3-49). The seven riparian plant communities found on the Project site are considered sensitive plant communities by CDFG, USFWS, and CNPS. Six of these communities would be impacted by the Project. In addition, the RSS found on the site is considered a sensitive plant community, even though it is not a riparian community. (EIR Table 5.3-5). Riversidean Sage Scrub: The Project would remove nearly all of the 168.4 acres of the RSS located on the site. CDFG regards RSS as a sensitive community. Therefore, the loss of 168.4 acres of RSS would be a significant impact. If the Project site contained listed species that were dependent upon RSS for their continued viability, then the RSS on the site could be considered of high value and the mitigation required would therefore be greater. (EIR at 5.3-49). However, no listed species dependent upon RSS have been detected on the site. This conclusion is based on over 11 years of general habitat assessment work and numerous focused surveys. While a number of California Species of Special Concern (SSC) have been observed within the RSS areas of the site, these species are not afforded specific legal protection as are formally listed species. (EIR at 5.3-50). Further, RSS remains relatively abundant throughout San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, with many thousands of acres still remaining. Notwithstanding, the loss of 168.4 acres of RSS habitat is expected to displace or adversely impact some of the SSC that could occur on the Project site. However, the applicant will purchase and permanently protect RSS habitat that is biologically equivalent or superior to the 168.4 acres of onsite RSS habitat, and will provide suitable habitat for many of these species. (Final EIR at 3-5). Specifically, Mitigation Measure 3-6 provides for the purchase of offsite mitigation lands and/or the payment of in lieu fees to appropriately offset the Project’s impact to RSS. (Id.). Mitigation Measure 3-6 also requires that the applicant 85 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 857 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations demonstrate that suitable mitigation lands have been identified and are available for acquisition, either through direct purchase or the payment of fees. The Project applicant has identified several hundred acres of potential mitigation lands containing suitable RSS habitat along the alluvial fans of the San Bernardino and San Gabriel Mountains. These lands are available for purchase and dedication to an appropriate conservation management organization. (Id.). This dedication and management would ensure the long-term conservation status of this sensitive habitat type in the San Bernardino Valley. It can therefore be concluded that the prescribed mitigation is feasible, and would thus mitigate the Project’s impacts in this regard to less than significant levels. Riparian Plant Communities: Seven riparian plant communities are present on the site, and six of these would be impacted by Project development. (EIR Table 5.3-5). The 25.4 acres of southern sycamore-alder riparian woodland (“SSARW”) present on the site are located along the upper reaches of Cable Creek and are outside of the Project footprint. Therefore, they would not be impacted by the proposed development. (EIR at 5.3-50). Each of the remaining six communities, totaling 26.4 acres, that would be impacted by the project represent valuable habitat and are considered high priority for conservation by CDFG, USFWS, and CNPS. Loss of these communities would represent a significant impact. Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub is one of these riparian communities. (Id.). Besides the direct impacts associated with Project development, indirect impacts to offsite areas of RAFSS could also result from downstream impacts to the community from the secondary access road proposed across Cable Creek. The roadway could interrupt the stream flows and the occasional scourings that are required to maintain the long- term viability of RAFSS. If these processes are interrupted, RAFSS typically begins to convert to other community types that do not offer the same habitat characteristics. (Id.). This is especially relevant since the secondary access road areas are located in USFWS-designated critical habitat for SBKR. SBKR require the fluvial conditions that are present in properly functioning RAFFS habitat, so both RAFSS and SBKR are related in the type of conditions they require for their long-term viability. Therefore, the possible indirect loss of additional RAFSS habitat would represent a further significant impact. 86 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 858 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Based on the Project’s anticipated direct and indirect impacts on Corps, RWQCB, and CDFG jurisdictional areas, the Project applicant would be required to acquire a number of wetland disturbance permits prior to Project implementation. These permits would include a Section 404 permit from the Corps, a Section 401 permit from the RWQCB, and a Section 1602 permit from CDFG. (Id.). In addition, consultation with the USFWS under Section 7 of the FESA would be required, because portions of the Project site are within unoccupied critical habitat for SBKR. Each of these agencies would impose mitigation measures to offset the loss of jurisdictional and habitat areas. In anticipation of these agency requirements, mitigation is recommended in this EIR to reduce the Project’s impacts in this regard to less than significant levels. (Id.). Mitigation Measure 3-6 includes measures relating to the adoption of BMPs to avoid direct and indirect impacts to remaining riparian areas and Project design requirements to lessen impacts to offsite areas, and also requires the purchase of offsite mitigation lands and/or the payment of in-lieu fees. The mitigation further requires that the applicant demonstrate that suitable mitigation lands have been identified and are available for acquisition, either through direct purchase or the payment of fees. (EIR at 5.3-51). The Project applicant has identified areas of potential mitigation lands containing suitable riparian habitat along the alluvial fans and foothills of the San Bernardino and San Gabriel Mountains. These lands are available for purchase and dedication to an appropriate conservation management organization. This dedication and management would ensure the long-term conservation status of these sensitive habitat types in the San Bernardino Valley. (Id.). It can therefore be concluded that Mitigation Measure 3-6 is feasible, and would mitigate the Project’s impacts to riparian habitats to less than significant levels. Mitigation for impacts to RAFSS habitat has already been discussed above in regards to mitigation for unoccupied critical habitat for SBKR. Since the unoccupied SBKR habitat that would be impacted by the Project is composed exclusively of RAFFS, Mitigation Measure 3-2 (which is prescribed for unoccupied SBKR habitat) would also serve to mitigate for impacts to RAFFS. (Id.). It can therefore be concluded that impacts on the Project site associated with RAFFS would be mitigated to less than significant levels. 87 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 859 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Invasive Plant Impacts: The Project site represents good quality habitat and a diverse mosaic of plant communities, and is unusual for its relative lack of invasive plant species. (EIR at 5.3-51). Unlike other areas along the front range of the San Bernardino Mountains, the Project site has not converted to large areas of nonnative grassland. Only 11.4 acres of the Project site, or about 3 percent, has converted to this community type. The areas immediately surrounding the site, particularly in the San Bernardino National Forest, are also relatively unaffected by type conversion. The placement of a residential community into an area of native vegetation represents a potential impact to these surrounding natural areas. Nonnative species can be inadvertently introduced into native habitats in a number of ways, including: 1) the use of invasive species within the landscaping palette; 2) After construction has finished, residents can unknowingly introduce invasive species by using them for landscaping purposes on their properties, or 3) seeds or other invasive plant parts can be inadvertently imported onto the site during construction activities. (Id.). The first of these potential impacts can be avoided or mitigated through the selection of an appropriate plant palette that does not include species identified as invasive or otherwise undesirable. The proposed plant palette for the Project contains no federal- or state-listed invasive plants. (See EIR Appendix G). One species within the proposed plant palette (Aptenia cordifolia) was determined to be potentially invasive based on the list contained in Invasive Plants of California Wildlands (Bossard et al. 2000). However, the palette specifically prohibits the use of Aptenia cordifolia in areas adjacent to wildlands. Rather, planned uses for the species are restricted to interior portions of the site. Since the species spreads vegetatively rather than through seed dispersal, use of the species within interior portions of the development would pose minimal risk in regards to establishment within wildland areas. (EIR at 5.3-52). Mitigation Measure 3-7 will be incorporated to place restrictions on homeowners through the use the covenants, codes, and restrictions, which will be regulated through the homeowner’s association to prohibit the use of known invasive plants. (Id.). By restricting the use of recognized invasive species by homeowners, the inadvertent introduction of invasive species can be avoided. Mitigation Measure 3-8 will impose controls on activities during the construction process that could result in the transport of invasive species onto the site on vehicles and 88 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 860 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations construction equipment, including the thorough washing of vehicles and equipment before they reach the site. Straw bales, erosion control products, and other potential invasive plant nexuses must be certified “weed free”, in addition to a number of other requirements. (Id.). Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3-7 to 3-8 will reduce impacts in this area to less than significant levels. c. Potential Significant Impact: Jurisdictional Areas and Riparian Habitats. The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Finding:Impacts related to Biological Resources are discussed in detail at Section 5.3 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the potential for the Project to have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means is potentially significant, but can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through implementation of Mitigation Measures 3-3, 3-6 and 3-11. These Mitigation Measures are adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 3-3 To mitigate for potential impacts to hydrological processes and subsequent degradation of habitat for the federally endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat and other sensitive species, all roadway crossings or other improvements proposed within critical habitat for the species shall be designed in such a manner as to not substantially alter the natural flow regimes through impacted sensitive habitat areas. These designs shall include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, the installation of appropriate culverts and stream crossings that allow for natural flow and uninhibited downstream hydrological processes. Design of these improvements shall be undertaken in consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service and other responsible agencies. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of grading permits. 3-6 To mitigate impacts to 168.4 acres of Riversidean sage scrub (RSS) and 26.4 acres of riparian plant communities, the project applicant shall do one of the following, or a combination thereof, prior to the issuance of grading permits: 1) acquire offsite permanent mitigation lands of like habitat as determined by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG); and/or 2) pay appropriate in-lieu fees to an appropriate 89 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 861 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations permanent mitigation land bank as determined by CDFG. Mitigation lands must be acquired prior to the issuance of grading permits, and shall incorporate appropriate long-term management provisions, such as deed restrictions, endowments, and/or other management mechanisms to provide for the long-term conservation of the habitat. Potential properties include, but are not limited to, those managed by San Bernardino County Special Districts located in the Glen Helen, Rialto, and Rancho Cucamonga areas. Mitigation lands for riparian habitat shall be acquired at a replacement ratio of 1:1 (one acre replaced for every one acre impacted). Mitigation lands for RSS shall be acquired at a replacement ration of 1:3 (one acre replaced for every three acres impacted). This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 3-11 Two known wildlife corridors are present on the project site and may be impacted by the proposed project unless mitigation is incorporated: 1) the unnamed tributary of Cable Creek that flows in an east-to-west direction in the northern third of the project site (referred to here as the Northern Corridor); and 2) the outwash of Cable Creek adjacent to the Interstate 215 freeway that is proposed to be crossed by the secondary access road (referred to here as the Southern Corridor). For these corridors, the following must occur: Northern Corridor: 1) Native vegetation within this corridor must be restored, enhanced and maintained to the maximum extent allowed by the Fire Protection Plan; 2) riparian vegetation that provides high-quality foraging opportunities, cover, and other habitat values shall be the preferred vegetation type in this area, unless specifically prohibited by the Fire Protection Plan; 3) this area shall be the preferred location for the planting of replacement native trees as outlined in the tree replacement requirements of Mitigation Measure 3-11, unless specifically prohibited by the Fire Protection Plan; 4) the corridor shall be maintained free of fences, walls, or other obstructions; 5) any lighting associated with the project in this area, including street lights and residential lights, shall be of the minimum output required and shall be down-shielded to prevent excessive light bleed into adjacent areas; 6) any road crossings, bridges, culverts, etc., shall be constructed with soft bottoms with an openness ratio of at least 0.9 (openness ratio=height x width/length); and 7) additional recommendations as outlined in the report entitled “A Linkage Design for the San Gabriel-San Bernardino Connection” (South Coast Missing Linkages Project 2004) may be incorporated as feasible and appropriate. Southern Corridor: 1) Any bridge, culvert, or other road crossing structure shall be designed in such a manner as to allow for the maintenance of natural flow through the structure and downstream of the structure, as conditioned by the US Fish and Wildlife Service during the Section 7 permitting process; 2) any road crossings, bridges, culverts, etc., shall be constructed with soft bottoms with an openness ratio of at least 0.9 (openness ratio=height x width/length); and 3) additional recommendations as outlined in the report entitled “A Linkage Design for the San Gabriel-San Bernardino Connection” (South Coast Missing Linkages Project 2004) may be incorporated as feasible and appropriate. 90 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 862 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations These measures shall be incorporated into site development plans and must be reviewed and approved prior to the issuance of grading permits. This measure does not preclude the requirement of additional mitigation that may be initiated by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, or the California Department of Fish and Game during the regulatory permitting process. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project would impact areas under the jurisdiction of the Corps, RWQCB, and CDFG. The Project applicant would be required to apply for relevant regulatory permits related to such impacts. The jurisdictional delineations prepared for the Project site determined that 15.85 acres are subject to U.S. Army Corps jurisdiction, and 26.65 acres are subject to CDFG jurisdiction. Impacts to U.S. Army Corps jurisdictional waters are limited to 10.56 acres, and 12.76 acres of CDFG jurisdictional areas. (EIR Appendix D8). Approximately 6.2 acres of the identified jurisdictional areas are in a potential seasonal wetland in the southern third of the site near the San Andreas Fault (EIR Figure 5.3-3), which is accounted for in all of the above acreage calculations. All 6.2 acres will be lost due to development of the Project. (These 6.2 acres of seasonal wetland was identified as a “problem area” because while hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology were present, no apparent hydric soil indicators were present during the delineation. The approximate boundary or this potential seasonal wetland was therefore delineated based primarily on vegetation and hydrology criterion. A subsequent study of the seasonal wetland system will be conducted prior to the permitting process to verify that the feature is indeed a wetland system and to provide the additional data needed on current condition and function of the wetlands for determining wetland mitigation. With the completion of the draft 401 permit, the applicant will confer with the Water Quality Control Board regarding the adequacy of the existing CEQA documentation, and if warranted, subsequent CEQA documentation will be prepared. (Id.). The wetlands quantities listed consider all of the identified jurisdictional areas located within the Project development footprint and consider all grading and slopes proposed for development. (EIR at 5.3-52). The Project applicant would be required to acquire a number of wetlands permits prior to Project implementation. These permits would include a 91 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 863 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Section 404 permit from the Corps, a Section 401 permit from the RWQCB, and a Section 1602 permit from CDFG. A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan will be prepared as part of the Section 404 permit. (EIR at 5.3-53). Since the Project would impact more than 0.5 acres of Corps jurisdictional areas, the Project would be required to obtain a Section 404 Individual Permit rather than apply for clearance under the Nationwide Permit. Consultations with the USFWS under Section 7 of the ESA would also be required, as portions of the Project site are within critical habitat for SBKR. Each of these agencies would impose mitigation measures to offset the loss of jurisdictional and habitat areas. (EIR at 5.3-53). In anticipation of those agency requirements, Mitigation Measures 3-3, 3-6 and 3- 11 are recommended to reduce the Project’s impacts in this regard to less than significant levels. (Id.). The mitigation requires the adoption of BMPs to avoid direct and indirect impacts to remaining habitat areas, and also imposes specific design requirements to lessen additional impacts to offsite areas and to provide for the continued movement of animals through the area. The mitigation also requires the purchase of offsite mitigation lands and/or the payment of in-lieu fees. Finally, the mitigation also requires that the applicant demonstrate that suitable mitigation lands have been identified and are available for acquisition. (Id.). The Project applicant has identified areas of potential riparian mitigation lands containing suitable riparian habitat along the alluvial fans and foothills of the San Bernardino and San Gabriel Mountains. These lands are available for purchase and dedication to an appropriate conservation management organization.This dedication and management would ensure the long-term conservation status of these sensitive habitat types in the San Bernardino Valley. (Id.). All mitigation for impacts to CDFG jurisdictional water will be biologically equivalent or superior in terms of value and function to offset the impacts to CDFG jurisdictional water including seasonal wetland, drainages and springs. The final requirements for mitigation will result from the 1602 Streambed Alteration Permit application process. As stated above, the City and the applicant will confer with CDFG once a draft 1602 permit is available, regarding the adequacy of the CEQA evaluation and to determine if additional CEQA documentation is needed. It can therefore be concluded that Mitigation Measures 3-3, 3-6 and 3-11 are feasible, and would thus mitigate the Project’s impacts to federally- 92 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 864 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations protected wetlands and riparian habitats to less than significant levels. d. Potential Significant Impact: Wildlife Corridors. The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could interfere substantially with the movement of a native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Finding:Impacts related to Biological Resources are discussed in detail at Section 5.3 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the potential for the Project to affect wildlife movement and wildlife nursery sites is potentially significant, but can be mitigated to a less-than- significant level through implementation of Mitigation Measures 3-9 to 3-12. Raptor foraging habitat and nesting birds would not be affected. These Mitigation Measures are adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 3-9 Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3-4 to mitigate potential impacts to sensitive species in Cable Creek shall also be applied to Impact 5.3-4. 3-10 With regard to the protection of nesting birds, one of the following must occur: 1) Construction should occur outside of the avian nesting season (approximately February 15 through August 31); or 2) If construction must occur during the nesting season, then a preconstruction nesting bird survey of the site shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to construction activities. If active nests are found onsite, then they must be avoided by an appropriate buffer until any young birds have fledged and the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified biologist. If construction occurs outside of the avian nesting period, then construction may commence without further impediment, commensurate with other regulatory and mitigation requirements. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 3-11 Two known wildlife corridors are present on the project site and may be impacted by the proposed project unless mitigation is incorporated: 1) the unnamed tributary of Cable Creek that flows in an east-to-west direction in the northern third of the project site (referred to here as the Northern Corridor); and 2) the outwash of Cable Creek adjacent to the Interstate 215 freeway that is proposed to be crossed by the secondary access road (referred to here as the Southern Corridor). For these corridors, the following must occur: Northern Corridor: 1) Native vegetation within this corridor must be restored, enhanced and maintained to the maximum extent allowed by the Fire Protection Plan; 2) riparian 93 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 865 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations vegetation that provides high-quality foraging opportunities, cover, and other habitat values shall be the preferred vegetation type in this area, unless specifically prohibited by the Fire Protection Plan; 3) this area shall be the preferred location for the planting of replacement native trees as outlined in the tree replacement requirements of Mitigation Measure 3-11, unless specifically prohibited by the Fire Protection Plan; 4) the corridor shall be maintained free of fences, walls, or other obstructions; 5) any lighting associated with the project in this area, including street lights and residential lights, shall be of the minimum output required and shall be down-shielded to prevent excessive light bleed into adjacent areas; 6) any road crossings, bridges, culverts, etc., shall be constructed with soft bottoms with an openness ratio of at least 0.9 (openness ratio=height x width/length); and 7) additional recommendations as outlined in the report entitled “A Linkage Design for the San Gabriel-San Bernardino Connection” (South Coast Missing Linkages Project 2004) may be incorporated as feasible and appropriate. Southern Corridor: 1) Any bridge, culvert, or other road crossing structure shall be designed in such a manner as to allow for the maintenance of natural flow through the structure and downstream of the structure, as conditioned by the US Fish and Wildlife Service during the Section 7 permitting process; 2) any road crossings, bridges, culverts, etc., shall be constructed with soft bottoms with an openness ratio of at least 0.9 (openness ratio=height x width/length); and 3) additional recommendations as outlined in the report entitled “A Linkage Design for the San Gabriel-San Bernardino Connection” (South Coast Missing Linkages Project 2004) may be incorporated as feasible and appropriate. These measures shall be incorporated into site development plans and must be reviewed and approved prior to the issuance of grading permits. This measure does not preclude the requirement of additional mitigation that may be initiated by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, or the California Department of Fish and Game during the regulatory permitting process. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project would result in impacts to an area that is used by a number of species for nursery sites, foraging, and movement. The Project site also provides habitat for nesting birds and marginally suitable habitat for foraging raptors. (EIR at 5.3-53). There is substantial evidence to indicate that the Project site serves as a corridor for a wide variety of wildlife species. Such areas are usually considered significant when they are determined to be of regional importance or otherwise contribute to regional conservation goals. The Project site can be considered to be composed of two principal parts in regard to wildlife movement. The first component is Cable Creek, which serves as an obvious corridor since it contains perennial water, adequate cover and food resources, and allows for 94 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 866 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the unimpeded movement of animals between higher and lower elevations. The riparian areas of Cable Creek are not planned for development, so the use of this corridor by wildlife would not be significantly impacted as a result of the proposed Project. (Id.). The exception to this is at the southern end of the site, where the outwash of Cable Creek would be crossed by the secondary access road. This roadway and associated culverts and drainage improvements could create a barrier to wildlife where currently no barrier exists. However, the roadway would be relatively narrow and can be designed in such a manner so that wildlife movement is not substantially impeded. In addition, the roadway would be constructed in USFWS- designated critical habitat for SBKR. (Id.). Furthermore, as part of the consultation process, USFWS would impose mitigation aimed at reducing the impact of the roadway on SBKR. These requirements would likely result in a positive benefit for other wildlife species as well. Therefore, mitigation required as part of this process would reduce the Project’s impact to wildlife movement within Cable Creek to less than significant levels. (EIR at 5.3-54). In anticipation of these agency requirements, Mitigation Measures 3-9 and 3-12 will be incorporated to reduce the Project’s impacts in this regard to less than significant levels, and include specific design requirements aimed at allowing the unrestricted movement of wildlife within the lower portion of Cable Creek. (Id.). With implementation of these measures, the Project’s impact in regard to the secondary access road crossing at Cable Creek would be less than significant. The second component relating to wildlife movement deals with wildlife movement across the site in an east-to- west direction and vice-versa. While the Cable Creek corridor on the western side of the site provides movement along a relatively narrow corridor in a north-to-south direction, the Project site itself provides lateral movements through a much wider area and across the base of the mountain front. (Id.). This impact could be considered significant, because the Project would effectively create a substantial barrier to wildlife movement across a large area. This potential impact can be mitigated by retaining and/or improving existing areas on the Project site that are conducive to wildlife movement. The large tributary that crosses the northern third of the site provides the most effective avenue for wildlife movement across the site. (EIR Figure 5.3-2). This is due to the fact that the 95 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 867 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations areas on both sides of the property at this point are essentially natural in composition and therefore allow animals to move across the site without having to navigate substantial human-made barriers. The tributary also affords movement into and out of Cable Creek and thus to areas both to the north and south of the site. Other portions of the Project area, especially the southern two-thirds of the site, do not offer these benefits. Those areas are somewhat blocked on the west by existing development, and they do not contain streams or other features that would be attractive to wildlife in terms of movement. (EIR at 5.3- 54). Retaining and/or improving this corridor would represent the greatest benefit to wildlife in terms of lateral movement across the site. The tributary offers specific characteristics, such as cover and foraging resources which make it especially suitable for wildlife movement. (Id.). In response to EIR comments received from CDFG, a barrier will also be constructed that will isolate Cable Creek from the development of the Project, and ensure that the biological integrity of Cable Creek as riparian habitat and a wildlife corridor is maintained. Care will be taken in selecting the barrier in an effort to preclude creating an attractive nuisance that could attract domestic dogs and cats and other small mammals that constitute a food source for top predators. (EIR at 5.3-61). The barrier will be installed at the outer limits of the California Walnut Woodland that surrounds Cable Creek at its interface with the RSS Habitat on the hillsides above the canyon bottom. This will provide a buffer of approximately 300 feet inside the barrier fence that will be located on either side of Cable Creek. This combination of a barrier and buffer should protect the natural resources associated with the use of Cable Creek as well as the wildlife movement corridor that found in association with Cable Creek. The applicant also evaluated the possibility of not developing north of Cable Creek and constructing a barrier on the south side of Cable Creek, isolating the riparian, RSS and chaparral habitats north of Cable Creek from the development. However, this would result in the loss of 24 estate lots from the development, and would not be economically viable as the result of the substantial infrastructure that is required for the development of the site, The project requires substantial infrastructure costs in terms of utilities, fire suppression, and roadways, in addition to the amenities included in the overall Specific Plan. Specifically, the project must acquire 96 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 868 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and develop both primary and secondary access roads, water tanks for fire suppression, utilities including water, sewer and electricity, as well as include fire protection and fire barriers at substantial cost to the project. These costs are in addition to mitigation requirements and the acquisition of mitigation lands.The infrastructure requirements create a substantial burden on the project and decrease the “per lot” ratio of return substantially with the elimination of each lot. Elimination of the 24 lots does not reduce the overall burdens of infrastructure costs and mitigation requirements for the Project, but reduces the rate of return by 9%. In sum, with implementation of the barrier and Mitigation Measures 3-9 to 3-12, the Project’s impact to wildlife corridors would be less than significant. Wildlife Nursery Sites: There is substantial evidence to indicate that the site provides habitat that is suitable for use as a wildlife nursery site. (Id.). Based on a number of observations over the years, the use of the site as a nursery site by mule deer is reasonably well established. Other species may utilize the site for this purpose as well, but this has not been observed or confirmed. Regardless, development of the Project site would disallow its continued use as a nursery site by mule deer. In determining whether or not the loss of this nursery site would constitute a significant impact, the species making use of the site must be considered. If a sensitive or listed species were known to use the area as a nursery site, then the loss of the site would be more problematic than if it were used by more common species. For this site, no sensitive or listed species has been observed using the site for nursery purposes. Mule deer are the only species that have been positively confirmed to use the area for this purpose, though it is likely that a number of other species, such as small mammals and birds, use the site for this purpose as well. None of these species, however, is a listed or sensitive species. (EIR at 5.3-55). Mule deer is a common species that is not regionally or locally threatened or endangered. The species occurs in great quantities throughout the region and western North America. Statewide, CDFG considers mule deer to be common and abundant. In 2008, CDFG issued 237,083 deer hunting tags statewide and an estimated 29,612 animals were harvested. In Deer Hunt Zone D14, (the CDFG management zone in 97 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 869 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations which the Project is located), CDFG and USFS consider mule deer populations to be stable or slightly declining. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that mule deer populations within the San Bernardino Mountains will be stable or perhaps even increase over the next several years. (Id.). CDFG manages mule deer through a number of means, the most well-known of which is hunting. Hunting is used as a tool to control species populations and to avoid overstocking within particular areas. The proposed Project site is located within CDFG Deer Hunt Zone D14, which is a zone that covers all of the San Bernardino Mountains portion of the SBNF as well as some peripheral areas. For at least the last decade, CDFG has maintained a hunt tag quota of 3,000 for Zone D14. This overall stability in CDFG’s management of mule deer in the San Bernardino Mountains is consistent with the agency’s determination that the mule deer population in the area is relatively stable. (Id.). Considering the overall abundance and the relative stability of mule deer populations in the area, it is reasonable to conclude that the loss of the nursery area on the Project site would be unlikely to result in anything but a negligible decline in the overall population of mule deer in the region, or even in this portion of the San Bernardino Mountains. The Project site is surrounded on three sides by the SBNF, which provides substantial open space opportunities for use as alternative nursery sites by mule deer. In addition, the Project would continue to maintain Cable Creek as an undisturbed perennial water source and wildlife corridor. Since a lack of perennial water is a major limiting factor in the maintenance of mule deer populations, the conservation of this watercourse would provide a substantial benefit to mule deer. Accordingly, the loss of this nursery site for mule deer would be less than significant. However, to avoid direct impacts to mule deer during the fawning season, Mitigation Measure 3-12 is recommended to lessen the potential for impacts to mule deer during initial grubbing and vegetation clearing, and includes specific requirements for scheduling vegetation clearing outside of the mule deer fawning season. (Id.). Nesting Birds: The Project site provides suitable habitat for a wide variety of nesting bird species. (EIR at 5.3-56). Breeding season typically runs from mid-February through late August. Ideally, ground-disturbing activities should take place outside of the breeding season, and doing so would reduce the Project’s impact to nesting birds to less 98 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 870 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations than significant levels. (Id.). If this is not possible and it is necessary to conduct ground-disturbing activities during the breeding season, then appropriate pre-construction surveys should be initiated in accordance with Mitigation Measure 3-10 to determine the presence or absence of nesting birds prior to construction. (Id.). Compliance with Mitigation Measure 3-10 would reduce the Project’s impact to less than significant. Raptor Foraging Habitat: The Project site lacks expansive grassland habitat and is for the most part dominated by dense Riversidean sage scrub and chaparral. (Id.). These habitats do not provide particularly favorable conditions for foraging raptors due to the lack of prey visibility. It is estimated that suitable raptor foraging habitat is restricted to 12.5 acres of open grassland habitat. It can therefore be concluded that the site provides only marginally suitable foraging habitat for raptors and that these species would be more likely to rely on other areas for the majority of their foraging. Accordingly, the Project would not result in a significant impact to raptor foraging habitat. (EIR at 5.3-56). e.Conflict with Local Policy, Ordinance or Habitat Conservation Plan. Potential Significant Impact:The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance, or conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan,Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Finding:Impacts related to Biological Resources are discussed in detail at Section 5.3 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the potential for the Project to conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance, or to conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan is potentially significant, but can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through implementation of Mitigation Measures 3-13 to 3-14. These Mitigation Measures are adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 99 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 871 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 3-13 Significant tree resources that are removed from the site during project development shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio or at the exchange ratios specific below. Significant tree resources are defined as any native or nonnative ornamental tree—excluding species of the Eucalyptus genus—that is healthy, structurally sound, and over 20 feet in height. For California black walnut (Juglans californica var. californica), all specimens of the species shall be regarded as significant, regardless of size or height. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a certified arborist shall conduct an inventory of all significant trees within the development footprint. This inventory shall be used to determine the number and types of significant trees that will be impacted and the subsequent replacement quantities. The number of replacement trees shall be, at a minimum, 220 trees. Should the aforementioned inventory determine that a greater number of significant trees will be impacted, then that quantity shall be used in determining replacement quantities. For purposes of replacement ratios, the following exchange ratios shall be used: 1) one 36- inch box tree is equivalent to one replacement tree; 2) five 15-gallon trees are equivalent to one replacement tree; 3) 10 five-gallon trees are equivalent to one replacement tree; and 4) 15 one-gallon trees are equivalent to one replacement tree. During the development of the project, the project applicant shall incorporate the recommendations as set forth in the project arborist report (Integrated Urban Forestry 1998). A certified arborist shall be retained at the developer’s expense to oversee the implementation of these requirements and to specify other requirements as deemed appropriate. The measures to be followed include, but are not limited to, specified protocols for the following: 1) the removal of nonnative trees from the site; 2) the removal and transplantation, when feasible, of structurally sound and healthy native trees to other areas of the project site; 3) the installation of tree protection barriers on all trees to be preserved that are within the reach of vehicles and equipment; 4) tree protection training of construction personnel by a certified arborist; 5) irrigation of trees where the natural water supply is interrupted or diminished or where protected trees may require additional water to endure construction-induced stresses; 6) subsequent replacement of any trees that are damaged or have not survived transplantation and relocation; and 7) implementation of the tree replacement plan, as outlined in the first paragraph of this measure. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 3-14 Prior to the commencement of ground-disturbing activities, the developer shall retain the services of qualified specialists, approved by the City, to oversee the long-term effectiveness of the biological resources mitigation required in this EIR. When appropriate, the services of these specialists may be combined so long as the person(s) so employed possess the requisite training and skills necessary to effectively carry out their duties to professional standards. Those specialists shall conduct reviews of the project site for a minimum of five years, as measured from the day of beginning of initial ground disturbance. Reviews shall be conducted, as applicable, on a monthly basis for the first year following initiation, on a quarterly basis during the second and third years, and on an annual basis during the fourth and fifth years. The intensity of monitoring may be increased or the monitoring period extended if the City or relevant Responsible Agency (i.e., CDFG, USFWS, RWQCB, etc.) determines that conditions on the ground warrant 100 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 872 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations such action. The qualified specialists to be retained and the nature of their duties are as follows: Biologist: A qualified biologist shall monitor the effectiveness of Mitigation Measures 3-1, 3-2, 3-4, 3-6, 3-10, 3-11, 3-12, and 3-14. Noxious/Invasive Plant Control Specialist: A person who is qualified in the field of noxious plant management and control shall monitor the effectiveness of Mitigation Measures 3-7 and 3-8. Arborist: A certified arborist shall monitor the effectiveness of Mitigation Measure 3-13. Hydrologist/Stormwater Control Specialist: A qualified hydrologist and/or stormwater control specialist shall monitor the effectiveness of Mitigation Measures 3-3, 3-4, and 3-6. Following each monitoring session, these specialists shall file brief reports with the Community Development Director concerning the effectiveness of the prescribed mitigation. The specialist shall identify and call out any corrective actions required to assure that the purposes of the mitigation are being effectively pursued. The developer shall comply with any corrective measures so prescribed. Monitoring may cease if the qualified specialist determines that the terms of the mitigation have been satisfactorily implemented and that further monitoring is no longer required. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Facts in Support of the Finding: The City of San Bernardino has adopted a tree ordinance that regulates the removal and replacement of native and nonnative trees that are impacted by development. City General Plan policies and goals would also apply to the site. (EIR at 5.3-56). Development of the Project would result in the removal of approximately 2,400 trees. The majority of native trees are located within and around Cable Creek or in the northern portion of the site, and are not within the development footprint. (See EIR Table 5.3-3; Figure 5.1-1). These trees would not be impacted by the Project. Of the approximately 2,400 trees within the development footprint, only about 220 of these (less than 1 percent) are native species, mostly walnut and sycamore. Impacts to California Walnut Woodland will be limited to 2.1 acres as the Project is currently proposed, and there are sufficient acres of California Walnut Woodland in the area to adequately mitigate for the loss of the 2.1 acres of this sensitive habitat. The majority of the trees requiring removal are part of a remnant eucalyptus plantation (approximately 2,170 trees). The remaining nonnative trees that would be removed consist of approximately 101 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 873 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 10 ornamental nonnative trees. (EIR at 5.3-56). Eucalyptus presents a specific problem for this site because they are nonnative and present a severe fire hazard. A great many of the trees are in poor condition and were classified as hazard trees in the arborist reports within the EIR. Eucalyptus trees are extremely flammable and in many areas are considered nuisance species. The Fire Protection Plan prepared for the Project mandates that all eucalyptus on the site be removed. These trees were originally planted as part of a cultivated eucalyptus plantation, primarily for the purpose of fuel wood production. Since tree plantations are specifically exempted from the mitigation requirements of the City of San Bernardino Tree Ordinance, replacement of these trees is not required. (EIR at 5.3-57). While eucalyptus can provide suitable nesting locations for raptors and other birds, their marginal biological value must be weighed against the hazards they present to public safety and their ability to carry wildfire to developed areas and surrounding wildlands. Based on these considerations, the removal of the eucalyptus on the Project site can be considered an overall benefit to the area, and therefore a less than significant impact. Conversely, native trees provide specific natural resource value in that they provide nesting habitat for raptors and cover and foraging habitat for other avian species, and they are important components of the natural ecosystem. (Id.) The trees are also aesthetically pleasing and therefore constitute an important resource in this regard. The City’s Tree Ordinance requires that “significant” trees be mitigated. In determining what constitutes a significant tree, the initial arborist report prepared for the site determined that healthy, structurally sound, native and ornamental trees over 20 feet in height be considered significant. Approximately 220 trees on the site met these criteria during the 1998 tree inventory. The removal of these trees during Project development would be considered a potentially significant impact, and thus subject to the mitigation requirements of the City’s Tree Ordinance. (Id.) Since the initial inventory of trees on the site is over 12 years old and the exact count of significant trees may have changed, Mitigation Measure 3-13 is incorporated to require an updated inventory of tree resources within the Project footprint. Mitigation Measure 3-13 requires that specific management recommendations contained in the arborist reports be implemented. These 102 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 874 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations recommendations include protocols for removal and relocation of native trees, tree protection during construction, and the preservation of specific trees on the Project site. Performance measures are provided to mandate replacement ratios and the types and sizes of specimens required to meet the terms of the mitigation. Specifically, all trees will be replaced at a 1:1 ratio, with a minimum of 220 trees replaced. All tree replacement will be done in compliance with recommendations set forth in the two arborist reports prepared for the Project, and as directed by the City’s Heritage Tree Ordinance. Measures are also included to mandate improvements to tree resources in specific areas of the site. (Id.) Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3-13 would comply with the City of San Bernardino Tree Ordinance and would reduce the Project’s impacts in this regard to less than significant levels. City of San Bernardino General Plan: The City’s General Plan provides a number of goals and policies directed toward the conservation of biological resources. The goals and policies generally center around three principal areas: 1) General conservation goals and special requirements for development within Biological Resource Management Areas (“BRMAs”) (Goal 12.1); 2) Protection of riparian areas (Goal 12.2); and 3) The conservation of open space and other priority areas (Goal 12.3). General Plan Goal 12.1 contains policies that require developments to be designed in a manner that is sensitive to unique biological resources, and it also prescribes specific conditions for developments proposed within BRMAs. According to Figure NRC-2 of the General Plan, the project site is located within a BRMA. To be consistent with the General Plan, projects in BRMAs must submit biological resource assessments and other information that identifies the proposed project’s impacts on sensitive biological resources. (EIR at 5.3-57). The Spring Trails Project site has been the subject of numerous technical studies over the last decade. As such, the Project is consistent with this requirement. Projects within BRMAs are required to identify mitigation measures to eliminate significant adverse impacts to sensitive biological resources. (Id.). As discussed above, a number of mitigation measures have been identified for the Project, and upon implementation of these measures no significant impacts remain. Therefore, 103 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 875 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the Project is consistent in this regard as well. Projects within BRMAs are required to define a plan to monitor the effectiveness of prescribed mitigation. The establishment of such a monitoring program is prescribed as Mitigation Measure 3-14 for this Project, which includes requirements for annual surveys for a minimum of five years after project development, actions to be taken if certain performance measures are not met, and methods for overseeing the monitoring program. (EIR at 5.3-58). With implementation of Mitigation Measure 3-14, the Project is consistent with this policy of the General Plan. Finally, the policies within Goal 12.1 require that projects consider and discuss the restoration of significant habitats. While the General Plan is not particularly clear on this issue, it appears that the intent of the policy is to provide for the restoration of habitats that have been degraded or otherwise historically altered through human activity. This policy does not particularly apply to this Project, since the bulk of the habitat on the site is intact and is not degraded. (Id.). Regardless of the policy’s intent, the Project as designed and mitigated would improve specific areas of habitat within the Project area. Most notably, the mitigation prescribed for wildlife corridor conservation also includes requirements to improve habitats in those areas. Improvements include the planting and maintenance of additional native vegetation to enhance wildlife foraging and movement areas. In addition, the most significant habitat on the Project site, the riparian areas of Cable Creek, would be preserved and would not be impacted by the Project’s development. Finally, the Project applicant would be required to purchase offsite mitigation lands or pay in-lieu fees for the permanent preservation of sensitive wildlife habitat within the region. (Id.). Based on these considerations, it is thus reasonable to conclude that the Project meets and exceeds the overall goals of the policy. General Plan Goal 12.2 contains policies that pertain to the conservation of riparian resources. The goal also contains directives on what activities are specifically allowed to occur within riparian areas. (Id.). The General Plan specifies that development and grading within 50 feet of riparian corridors is prohibited unless no feasible alternative exists. In the case of the Spring Trails Project, the riparian corridor of Cable Creek lies outside of the Project footprint. (Id.). In regard to the hiking and equestrian trail that is planned for this area, Mitigation 104 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 876 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Measure 3-4 (discussed above) imposes specific restrictions on the trail’s proximity to the creek as well as other design requirements to protect riparian resources. Two other riparian corridors on the site would be spanned by roadways. However, Mitigation Measure 3-11 for these bridges and/or culverts will minimize impacts to riparian areas, and requires the enhancement of the large area of riparian vegetation that crosses the northern third of the site. These enhancements would allow for the onsite conservation of this area and provide opportunities for wildlife movement within this corridor. (Id.). Based on each of these mitigation requirements, together with other Project design features, the Project would be in compliance with all General Plan policies relating to the conservation of riparian areas. General Plan Goal 12.3 provides directives as to types of habitats that are considered a high priority for long-term preservation. The goal specifically calls out the City’s desire to preserve the riparian corridor of Cable Creek. Since the Project would permanently conserve the Cable Creek corridor, the Project is consistent with the General Plan in this regard. (Id.). The plan also specifies other high priority habitat types, including endangered species habitat, alluvial scrub vegetation, riparian vegetation, and native walnut woodlands. The Spring Trails Project would provide for the conservation of each of these resource types, either through onsite conservation and/or enhancement, or through the purchase and dedication of offsite mitigation lands. (EIR at 5.3-59). Therefore, it can be determined that the Project is consistent with the General Plan in this regard. In sum, incorporation of Mitigation Measures 3-13 to 3-14 will reduce impacts in this area to less than significant levels. 2.Cultural Resources. a. Potential Significant Impact: Archeological Resources. The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. Finding:Impacts related to Cultural Resources are discussed in detail at Section 5.4 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant but can be mitigated to a less 105 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 877 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations than significant level through the implementation of Mitigation Measures 4-1 to 4-3. These mitigation measures are adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 4-1 Preconstruction archaeological testing by a qualified archaeologist is required to evaluate the significance of historic Cable Canyon Ranch. A qualified archaeologist must be present for grubbing, devegetation, and demolition of the spring, remnant stone structure, and fence to protect resources that may be revealed by these activities. Subsequent to vegetation removal but before construction, the archaeologist will perform controlled mechanical excavation inside and outside the house area to locate features present below the ground surface. Once located, the archaeologist should develop a formal treatment plan (plan of work including research questions to be answered and containing an agreement with an accredited repository). Excavation of subsurface features can include additional mechanical excavation or hand excavation as warranted by the features. Discovery of features and recovery of archaeological materials will require extensive sampling, documentation, laboratory work, identification, analysis, and interpretation. The final report should include formal evaluation and significance assessment of each feature and the project catalog and be filed with the City, the San Bernardino Archaeological Information Center, and the repository (San Bernardino County Museum recommended). The site records should also be updated. 4-2 If testing determines that the Cable Canyon Ranch complex meets significance criteria, then preconstruction archaeological data recovery excavations by a qualified archaeologist is required to mitigate the adverse impacts of construction on historic Cable Canyon Ranch. The archaeologist should develop a formal data recovery plan (plan of work including research questions to be answered and containing an agreement with an accredited repository). Excavation of subsurface features can include additional mechanical excavation or hand excavation as warranted by the features. Discovery of features and recovery of archaeological materials will require extensive sampling, documentation, laboratory work, identification, analysis, and interpretation. The final report should include the project catalog and be filed with the City, the San Bernardino Archaeological Information Center, and the repository (San Bernardino County Museum recommended). The site records should also be updated. 4-3 Construction grading in and around the Cable Canyon Ranch complex must be monitored by a qualified archaeologist to ensure that any subsurface features or refuse deposits that were not located during previous phases of archaeological work are found and evaluated. The City should refuse to issue a final occupancy permit until all mitigation is demonstrated to have been performed, including curation of the project documents and artifacts. Facts in Support of the Finding: Eight (8) historical archeological resources were recorded within the Project area. (EIR at 5.4-12). A spring reported to have associated water features was noted in earlier 106 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 878 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations surveys, but obscured by vegetation in recent surveys. Most of the resources do not meet significance criteria under CEQA. (EIR Table 5.4-1). However, some sites have potential to have subsurface components that would yield information new to history. These sites require further investigation. Should those investigations yield CRHR- eligible archaeological materials, then destruction of those resources as a result of Project construction would be a significant impact. The potentially significant resources are expected subsurface privies and trash features associated with Cable Canyon Ranch, in addition to both surface and possibly subsurface water features associated with the Cable Canyon Ranch spring. (EIR at 5.4-12). Mitigation through archaeological data recovery as prescribed by Mitigation Measures 4-1 to 4-3 would reduce impacts in this area to less than significant. b. Potential Significant Impact: Paleontological Resources of Unique Geological Feature. The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature. Finding:Impacts related to Cultural Resources are discussed in detail at Section 5.4 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant but can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4-4. This mitigation measure is adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 4-4 Cultural resources sensitivity training is required for all earth-moving personnel. This training will review the types of archaeological and paleontological resources that might be found, along with laws for the protection of resources. In the event of an unanticipated discovery, all work must halt within a 30-foot radius of the find. Work may not continue until the find has been evaluated by a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist, depending on the nature of the discovery. All discoveries require scientific samples and documentation, including a final report. Facts in Support of the Finding: According to the Cogstone Study (EIR Appendix E), there are several sedimentary formations that are old enough to contain the remains of extinct Pleistocene animals; however, these sediments are so coarse that they are not conducive to the preservation of significant fossil resources. (EIR at 5.4-13). Additionally, the survey found 107 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 879 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations no signs of any paleontological resources within the Project area. However, an unanticipated discovery of paleontological resources during grading and excavation of the site could occur and result in paleontological resource impacts if not mitigated. Therefore, Mitigation Measure 4-4 will be incorporated to require cultural resources training for all earth-moving personnel, and will reduce impacts in this area to a less than significant level. c. Potential Significant Impact: Disturbance of Human Remains. The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Finding:Impacts related to Cultural Resources are discussed in detail at Section 5.4 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant but can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the implementation of Mitigation Measures 4-5 and 4-6. These mitigation measures are adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 4-5 The applicant shall implement one of the mitigation measures outlined below to address anomalies found at the presumed location of the Meyers Family Cemetery. The applicant shall consult with the Meyers family descendants in the selection of the appropriate mitigation options for the Meyers Family Cemetery in conjunction with the proposed development. It shall be a high priority to implement an option that most closely meets the desires of the family to the extent feasible under the final approved development and grading plans. In the event the final development and grading permits do not require grading or other disturbance of the anomaly sites, one of the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1.The burial site anomalies/remains shall remain undisturbed. This can be accomplished either by complete avoidance of the project area or alternatively by “capping” the site. Capping the site would involve scraping existing vegetation and providing up to two feet of compacted fill material over the site. No activity under this option shall excavate lower than one foot below grade to remove existing vegetation or soil. Replacement vegetation may be placed for future open space such as a park. Plans to cap the site shall be prepared and reviewed/approved by a certified archaeologist prior to the disturbance of the cemetery site surface. In addition, a covenant in the deed shall restrict any future excavation within 25 feet of the anomalies. 108 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 880 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 2.The applicant shall coordinate with the Meyers family to facilitate excavation of the anomalies to determine if they represent coffins and, if so, to coordinate reburial at a private or public cemetery to be determined by the family. Under this option, preconstruction archaeological testing by a qualified archaeologist is required. The archaeological testing must consist of mechanical excavation of overburden and hand excavation near the anomalies to determine if they represent coffins. The excavation shall occur under the supervision of a certified archaeologist and a Meyers family representative. If the anomalies are demonstrated not to contain coffins, no further work will be required. If coffins are present, the family shall determine the desired deposition. This may include transfer of the undisturbed coffins for reburial or option 3 below. The applicant shall be responsible for the transport of relocating the remains for the family. If desired by the family, the applicant shall also be responsible for funding a family memorial plaque near to the original burial site. In the event the site is not avoided as part of the final development and grading permits, and testing demonstrates that coffins are, in fact, present, the applicant shall implement option 2 or option 3 below: 3.A qualified archaeologist shall develop a formal treatment plan (plan of work including research questions to be answered). The excavation team shall include a qualified osteologist. Excavation may include mechanical excavation of overburden and hand excavation of human skeletal materials. The treatment plan should include an agreement with the Meyers family as to the disposition of any human skeletal remains. A final report shall include formal evaluation and the project catalog and be filed with the City and the San Bernardino Archaeological Information Center. The site record should also be updated. 4-6 If human remains are discovered at any time, the applicant shall follow guidelines addressed in California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. This requires that work in the vicinity must halt and the county coroner must be notified immediately. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner will contact the Native American Heritage Commission. All discoveries require verification and documentation, including a final report. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Native American Heritage Commission was contacted, and no sacred land was identified on the Project site. (EIR at 5.4-13). However, the Meyer Family Cemetery site has been located using geophysical investigation, and two graves appear to be present. It is unknown whether the rectangular areas represent intact graves or removal excavations. Human skeletal remains are considered significant under CEQA for potential to yield information new to history, and the Project site requires further investigation. (Id.). Should those investigations yield CRHR-eligible archaeological materials, any destruction of those resources as a result of Project construction would be 109 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 881 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations a significant impact. Thus, mitigation through archaeological data recovery as prescribed by Mitigation Measures 4-5 and 4-6 will be incorporated in order to reduce impacts to less than significant. d.Cumulative Impacts. Potential Significant Impact:The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could result in cumulative impacts to Cultural Resources. Finding:Impacts related to Cultural Resources are discussed in detail at Section 5.4 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant but can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the implementation of Mitigation Measures 4-1 to 4-6, as discussed above. These mitigation measures are adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing potentially significant cumulative impacts to a less than significant level: Facts in Support of the Finding: Future construction projects in the City of San Bernardino are required to undergo environmental review. (EIR at 5.4-14). If there is a potential for significant impacts on cultural or paleontological resources, an investigation would be required to determine the nature and extent of the resources and identify appropriate mitigation measures. (Id.). Neither the Project nor cumulative development in accordance with the City’s General Plan is expected to result in significant impacts to cultural or paleontological resources, provided site-specific surveys and test and evaluation excavations are conducted to determine whether the resources are unique archaeological or historical resources and appropriate mitigation is implemented prior to grading. (Id.). Implementation of the appropriate mitigation measures would reduce cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. 3.Geology and Soils. a. Exposure of People or Structures to Potential Adverse Effects. Potential Significant Impact:The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could expose people or structures to potential adverse effects from rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong ground shaking, or seismic-related ground failure such as liquefaction and settlement. 110 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 882 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding:Impacts related to Geology and Soils are discussed in detail at Section 5.5 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant, but can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the implementation of Mitigation Measures 5-1 to 5-3. These mitigation measures are adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 5-1 Prior to recordation of final maps, additional fault studies shall be conducted to the satisfaction of the geotechnical consultant of record on the project and the City Engineer. These studies shall include: 1. 2. Trenching across Splay E to locate the splay and gauge its activity in order to determine the required width of setbacks from the splay. A trench across Splay A in the western part of the site to confirm the location of the splay in that part of the site and to aid in determining the width of required setbacks from the splay. 3.A trench between Splays A and B in the central part of the site. If the geotechnical consultant recommends expanded or modified setbacks from faults based on the findings of such additional studies, then the project will be required to comply with such setbacks, and any lots that would not be developable according to the development standards of the Specific Plan will be eliminated prior to recordation of TTM 15576 or the associated phase of TTM 15576. 5-2 Prior to recordation of final maps, a detailed design-level geotechnical investigation report shall be prepared and submitted with engineering grading plans to further evaluate liquefaction, seismic settlement, lateral spreading, subsidence, collapsible soils, corrosive soils, slope stability including earthquake-induced landslides, and other geotechnical constraints and provide site-specific recommendations to address such conditions, if determined necessary. The geotechnical reports shall be prepared and signed/stamped by a Registered Civil Engineer specializing in geotechnical engineering and a Certified Engineering Geologist. The project will be required to comply with any recommendations that are made in the report of such investigation. 5-3 For each phase of the project, at the completion of grading and before project construction begins, final geotechnical testing for corrosive soils and expansive soils shall be conducted. A final geotechnical report for the relevant phase shall be prepared and signed/stamped by a Registered Civil Engineer specializing in geotechnical engineering and a Certified Engineering Geologist. Such report shall contain recommendations to address corrosive soils and expansive soils, as determined necessary. The project will be required to comply with any recommendations that are made in the report of such investigation. 111 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 883 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Finding: Five splays, or lineaments, of the San Andreas Fault have been identified onsite. Four of these splays are within Alquist-Priolo Fault Zones. (EIR 5.5-22). Fault trenching studies onsite found evidence that three lineaments, A, B, and C, are active splays of the fault. The onsite segments of Lineaments A, B, and C are within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone that covers much of the southern half of the site. The fourth lineament, lineament E, is within a second Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone near the northwest corner of the site and part of the fifth lineament, lineament D, partially runs through the eastern edge of the Project site, not in an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone. (EIR Figure 5.5-3). Lineaments E and D are not thought to be active fault splays. Setbacks extending 50 feet from each side of the three active lineaments have been designated so that no structures would be built in the setbacks. Pursuant to Mitigation Measure 5-1, additional investigation will be conducted to confirm findings in the geotechnical studies prepared for the Project, and trenching on the western part of Lineament A where trenching studies were not done previously in 1995. In addition, setbacks recommended by the Project geotechnical consultant would be incorporated into the project design; compliance with such recommendations would be required conditions of approval by the City of San Bernardino. The San Andreas Fault passes through the Project site, and several other faults in the region could potentially generate strong ground shaking at the site. (EIR at 5.5-23). The intensity of ground shaking used for the purpose of structural design is derived from the California Building Code (“CBC”), which contains seismic safety requirements for structures that will be adhered to for this Project. Seismic safety provisions in the CBC are developed with the intent that most structures would remain standing during and after an earthquake so that occupants would be able to evacuate, although many structures would be expected to be substantially damaged in a strong earthquake and would require repairs before they would be habitable again. (Id.). The potential for liquefaction on most of the Project site is considered to be low due to older alluvial/colluvial soils underlying the bulk of the site, plus the depth of groundwater, which is thought to be more than 50 feet below ground surface under most of the site. (Id.) There are 112 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 884 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations two limited areas of the site that are or may be susceptible to liquefaction: the lower parts of the Cable Canyon and Meyers Canyon drainages in the southern part of the site; and an isolated part of the eastern part of the site along the northeast side of the San Andreas Fault, where groundwater was found at 20 feet bgs in two borings. (Id.) The site plan almost entirely avoids placing homes over recent alluvium in the Cable Canyon and Meyers Canyon drainages. The geotechnical feasibility study for the Project recommends removal of loose or soft earth materials and undocumented fill to a depth of two to five feet below existing grades or two feet below the bottom of proposed footing depths, whichever is greater. (EIR at 5.5-24). Deeper removals are anticipated in isolated areas of the site, including the areas susceptible to liquefaction. Additionally, the Project site is not within a liquefaction hazard zone identified in the City of San Bernardino’s General Plan. (Id.) The subsurface soils under most of the site are relatively dense and thus are not expected to be prone to substantial seismic settlement. (Id.) Near-surface soils may be settlement prone; however, near-surface soils under the sites of homes, roads, and other improvements would be removed and replaced with compacted fill. Seismic settlement may pose a hazard where loose soils have been found near the San Andreas Fault. (Id.) However, development in this area would be limited to nonstructural improvements, and settlement-prone soils may be overexcavated to limit seismic settlement. In sum, incorporation of Mitigation Measures 5-1 to 5-3 will reduce impacts from rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong ground shaking, or seismic-related ground failure such as liquefaction and settlement to less than significant levels. 4.Hazards and Hazardous Materials. a. Potential Significant Impact: Risk of Fire. The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could result in exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to the urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. Finding:Impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials are discussed in detail at Section 5.6 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs 113 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 885 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant, because the Project site is in a very high fire hazard zone and could expose structures and/or residents to fire danger. Two lots (Lots 30 and 233) would not have sufficient space for fuel modification. However, this impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the implementation of Mitigation Measures 6-1 to 6-7. These mitigation measures are adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 6-1 6-2 The Fire Protection Plan shall be approved by the City of San Bernardino Fire Department (now County Fire) prior to commencement of grading. The Fire Marshal shall have the authority to modify, increase, or reduce the necessary size and location of any of the recommended Fire Management Zones and setbacks, based on a lot-by-lot inspection at time of grading. A minimum of 170 feet of fuel modification plus enhanced structural treatments listed in the Fire Protection Plan are needed to provide a safe buffer between the wildland and the structures. Prior to introduction of combustible materials on any lot, the developer or builder shall clear all flammable vegetation, including weeds to four inches in height or below (leave enough site. The builder shall maintain each site in this condition until the homeowner takes responsibility and installs irrigation and fire-resistive landscaping as approved by the Homeowners Association. All landscaping must be in compliance with the guidelines in the approved Fire Protection Plan. All manufactured slopes, internal common areas, and open spaces shall comply with the criteria set forth in the Fire Protection Plan and shall not have any vegetation of the type prohibited in this plan (undesirable plant list). 6-3 6-4 The Homeowners Association shall assure that all fuel modification on private lots is in accordance with the requirements in the plan. An annual inspection of the property for compliance with the approved plan shall be done by the Homeowners Association with a written letter of compliance sent to the San Bernardino Fire Department. Every five years, an approved Wildland Fire Protection consultant funded by the HOA shall inspect the site and a report shall be submitted to the San Bernardino Fire Department. Onsite Roadway Vegetation 6-5 Vegetation shall be modified and/or cleared, either by the Landscape Maintenance District or the Homeowners Association on each side of any onsite road in accordance with the approved Fire Protection Plan. 114 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 886 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations SCE Easement 6-6 If the project is built with the Southern California Edison 115 kV transmission lines remaining aboveground, all flammable vegetation within the SCE overhead electric line easement shall be removed, on an ongoing basis, except for that needed for erosion control and soil stability. Lots 30 and 233 6-7 Development of Lots 30 and 233 shall only occur when the following conditions are met. No development shall occur without the review and approval of the San Bernardino Fire Chief. The onsite fuel modification shall consist of irrigated “Zone A” and “Zone B” that will remain within the Spring Trails property. An irrigated “Zone A” shall be a non-combustible setback zone within the pad area between the residential structure and the wildland urban interface area, traditionally the furthest portion of the pad. “Zone B” shall be a landscaped irrigated zone beyond “Zone A” and terminating at the project boundary, with non-combustible construction which will act as a “heat-sink” from an impending wild fire. “Zone C” shall extend offsite as fuel modification. “Zone C” will be a temporary off-site fuel modification until the adjoining property is, or will be, developed. If this is the scenario, an easement will be required for maintenance of the “Zone C.” If the adjoining property is developed prior to the development of the Spring Trails project, then the off-site fuel modification will not be required for Lots 30 and 233. The total fuel modification distance for lots 30 and 233 will be a minimum of 170 feet.   For Lot 30, Zone A shall have a minimum/maximum distance of 20 feet, Zone B shall have a minimum distance of 88 feet and a maximum distance of 113 feet, and Zone C shall have a minimum distance of 37 feet and a maximum distance of 62 feet (a total of 15,469 square feet). For lot 233, Zone A shall have a minimum/maximum distance of 20 feet, Zone B shall have a minimum distance of 68 feet and a maximum distance of 112 feet in width, and Zone C shall have a minimum distance of 43 feet and a maximum distance of 80 feet (a total of approximately 20,706 square feet). Facts in Support of the Finding: The high fire risk associated with the natural features and conditions of the site causes the proposed development to be at a high fire risk and the impacts would be potentially significant. (EIR at 5.6-14). The entire Spring Trails Project site is in a very high fire hazard severity zone as identified in the California Fire Plan. (EIR at 5.6-10). The City’s General Plan also identifies areas of very high and high fire hazards in the areas immediately adjacent to the 115 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 887 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Project site. Since the Project site has not yet been annexed to the City, the portions of the fire hazard zones that would lie across the Project site and the adjacent 26.4-acre area are not indicated in the General Plan. (Id.) Periodic wildfire is a normal part of the environment in those areas along the front of the San Bernardino and San Gabriel mountains and in the adjacent San Bernardino National Forest, which surround the northern, western, and eastern portions of the site. (Id.) A fire risk analysis for the Project was performed (EIR Appendix G), which concluded that due to the steep terrain, highly flammable chaparral vegetation of the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains, and exposure to high-velocity winds, the site has high susceptibility to fire. (EIR at 5.6-10). Construction of the Project would expose future residents and structures to potentially dangerous wildfire(s) from the wildland to the northeast, northwest, and/or the southwest. The northeast exposure is a mix of chaparral and a few larger trees with a topography that is primarily upslope from the structures, with only a small amount level or downslope. This area is at risk for fire mainly when a northeast (Santa Ana) wind passes. The topography and fuel would otherwise drive fires away from the Project area. (Id.) The southeast exposure also consists of mixed chaparral. However, it has no real northern aspects to the topography that would increase fuel loading, and also has no wind shelter. (EIR at 5.6-11). Additionally, this area does not tend to have the old-growth, closed- canopy fuel type found in the other areas adjacent to the Project site. Areas within this exposure immediately to the east of the project site that may contain fuels are either in the drainage bottom or would be graded and replanted with appropriate vegetation. Fuels that would remain after Project development would be mostly in the downstream drainage of Meyers Canyon and outside of the fuel modification zones that would be created. (Id.) A northeast wind event would take fire away from the structures in this area. The only potential wind-driven fire in this area that would pose a significant risk would be from a heat- generated onshore wind. While these winds may prevail in this area, they tend to be less intense and generally higher in moisture content. The southwest exposure runs across a combination of developed and open, undeveloped land. Fires originating offsite in this area would be fueled by mixed native/nonnative grass and shrublands. The fire 116 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 888 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations would approach the Project site from the southwest and could spread and intensify if it reached the tree canopies under future conditions if vegetation is not managed. (Id.) Compliance with current City standards for weed abatement and brush clearance should keep this area safe. The southwest exposure only presents fire issues during a southwest wind event, which, like the southeast exposure, tends to be less intense and generally higher in moisture content. The northwest exposure is the most significant risk to the Project. During a northeast wind, the Cable Creek drainage and Cable Canyon Creek will channel winds and fire down to the area below the Project site. (Id.) This drainage is deep and full of native and nonnative vegetation that has survived through all of the recorded fire history because it tends to receive natural irrigation year-round. However, the vegetation on the sides of the drainage is primarily northern mixed chaparral and Riversidian sage scrub, both of which provide substantial fuel beds. (Id.) In addition to the topography and vegetation of the area, two prevailing wind events common to the area also contribute to the fire risk. The Santa Ana winds and winds produced by the thermal heating in the Mojave Desert would both be channeled by canyons in the area, increasing and concentrating the effects of these winds. (Id.) Fire risk factors were modeled to predict possible wildland fire behavior that could occur at the Project site based on characteristic features, including topography, vegetation, and weather. (EIR at 5.6-11). The worst-case scenario is a fire with Santa Ana winds reaching 70 miles per hour and a combination of dead and live fuels that would cause the hottest, fastest-moving fire. (EIR Tables 5.6-1; 5.6-2). The maximum anticipated flame lengths would be approximately 100.3 feet. (Id.) This type of fire occurs in the fall in chaparral vegetation, with approximately 16 tons per acre, at 6 to 10 feet in depth, producing 8,000 British thermal units per pound (BTU/lb) of fuel. Additionally, under worst-case scenario conditions, fire would spread at a rate of 40 feet per second (27.2 miles per hour), and spotting distances would reach approximately 1.4 miles. (EIR at 5.6-12). Fuel Modification Plan: The Project site has a combination of high risk (number of ignitions), high hazard (intensity of fire), and high value (proposed development), requiring significant mitigation measures in order to reduce 117 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 889 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations fire risk. (Id.) A fuel modification zone would be required to reduce impacts of fire on the Project. Fuel modification areas are designed to gradually reduce fire intensity and flame lengths from advancing fire by placing thinning zones, restricted vegetation zones, and irrigated zones adjacent to each other on the perimeter of all structures and adjacent open space areas. (Id.) Three fuel modification zones have been established within the fuel modification area: o Fuel Modification Zone A (flat): Noncombustible construction This applies to the 20 to 35 feet of the flat area setback zone near noncombustible construction only. Fuel Modification Zone A should be maintained by the homeowner or the HOA. At no time should the Fuel Modification Zone A be less than 20 feet. o Fuel Modification Zone B (wet zone): 100 percent removal of undesirable plant species. This applies to the first 50 to 200 feet from Fuel Modification Zone A. Fuel Modification Zone B shall be permanently irrigated; fully landscaped with approved drought- tolerant, deep-rooted, moisture-retentive material such as container shrub material; or hydroseeded per a plant list approved by the SBFD. All undesirable plants must be removed. A complete list of undesirable plant species is supplied in the Spring Trails Fire Protection Plan. Hand-seeding of bare areas may need to be performed six months after the hydroseeding establishment period. Fuel Modification Zone B would be maintained by the homeowner, HOA, or landscape maintenance district (LMD) as appropriate. o Fuel Modification Zone C (dry zone): 50 percent thinning of native shrubs. The area 40 to 185 feet from a structure would be Fuel Modification Zone C. This zone would be a non-irrigated area and would require the removal of all flammable undesirable species as listed in the Spring Trails Fire Protection Plan. Specimen trees should be retained as directed by the owner’s representative but must be thinned a minimum of 50 percent. This zone also requires the removal of all low-hanging foliage within three times the height of the understory shrubs or 10 feet, whichever is greater, along with dead or broken branches. All accumulated plant debris on the ground would be removed. Fuel 118 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 890 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Modification Zone C area should be maintained by the LMD. (See EIR Figures 5.6-1; Figure 5.6-2). Additionally, buildings not on the wildland interface/fuel modification zones would be set back from the adjacent property lines or any natural area adjacent to the homes by a 25- to 50-foot building setback. This zone would have no combustible construction allowed within it. (EIR at 5.6-13). Systems Approach: The concept behind this and most other fuel modification plans is to create a fuel modification zone in which the fire is systematically deprived of available fuel to reduce the size of the flame and the amount of heat that would be generated. (Id.) The maximum flame length of 100 feet is achieved at the junction of the wildland and Fuel Modification Zone C. For this reason, Fuel Modification Zone C is a minimum of 100 feet in width (measured on the flat plane not less than 100 feet regardless of the slope). Fuel Modification Zone C would have 50 percent of the available fuel that was in the wildland. (Id.) It would also have little to no dead materials or fine fuels. This would reduce flame lengths to a manageable size. When the flame front arrives at the junction of Fuel Modification Zones B and C, it should be reduced by 50 percent. Fuel Modification Zone B is a minimum of 50 feet in width and it is irrigated. The combination of the distance and the heat sink effect of the moist vegetation should keep flames from reaching the Fuel Modification Zone A/B junction. In the event that they do, however, a minimum 20-foot setback zone (Fuel Modification Zone A) is established with no combustible construction being allowed in this fuel modification zone at any time. Additionally, advanced construction features would be used to prevent convection or radiant heat from igniting the structure. (Id.) In areas where fuels, topography, slope, and aspect align, additional depth has been added to the fuel modification zones. This occurs on the upper portions of the project, where vegetation is below the structures, and on the east side of the project, where canyon winds may be channeled and thus intensified. (Id.) The final area for an increased fuel modification zone is on the east side of the project, located on the only cul-de-sac 119 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 891 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations where total alignment can occur. (EIR at 5.6-14; Figures 5.6-1; 5.6-2). Construction Phasing Management Plan: All vegetation management would be done on private lots prior to work beginning on those lots and prior to any combustible construction materials being brought onsite. (EIR at 5.6-14). Vegetation management in all common areas, parks, construction sites, medians, planters, roadsides, etc., would be done as required in this plan at the start of the construction phase and continued throughout the Project. (Id.) Adequate fuel breaks acceptable to the San Bernardino Fire Department would be created around all grading, materials storage areas, laydown areas, site work, and other construction activities in areas adjacent to the vegetation. (Id.) Public Education: In addition to the built-in fuel modification zones and construction techniques, the active participation of the homeowners is necessary to adequately protect Spring Trails. (Id.) Accordingly, the Specific Plan requires the following: o The fire threat, fuel modification zone requirements, maintenance responsibilities, protection plans, approved plant palette, list of unacceptable plants, preventative measures, and evacuation routes shall be disclosed to potential homebuyers prior to the sale of any residence and readily available to homeowners upon request. (Id.) The HOA would sponsor annual clinics conducted by fire professionals to educate residents on the fire threat, fuel modification zone requirements,maintenance responsibilities, protection plans, landscaping requirements, preventative measures, and evacuation routes. (Id.) With the implementation of Mitigation Measures 6-1 to 6-7, impacts from wildfire risk will be reduced to less than significant. b.High Winds. Potential Significant Impact:The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could result in exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving high winds. 120 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 892 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding:Impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials are discussed in detail at Section 5.6 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant, because the Project site is in a very high fire hazard zone and could expose structures and/or residents to fire danger. Two lots (Lots 30 and 233) would not have sufficient space for fuel modification. However, this impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the implementation of Mitigation Measures 6-8 and 6-9. These mitigation measures are adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 6-8 The development of Spring Trails shall follow development guidelines outlined in the San Bernardino General Plan for high wind areas (Policies 10.10.1 through 10.10.8). The building plans must be approved by the building official. o Policy 10.10.1: Ensure that buildings are constructed and sited to withstand wind hazards. o Policy 10.10.2: Require that development in the High Wind Hazard Area, as designated in Figure S-8 [of the San Bernardino General Plan], be designed and constructed to withstand extreme wind velocities. o Policy 10.10.3: Periodically review the structural design requirements for wind in the Building Code to reflect wind conditions and property damage experienced as well as advances to current construction technology. o Policy 10.10.4: Require that structures be sited to prevent adverse funneling of wind onsite and on adjacent properties. o Policy 10.10.5: Require that multi-story residential, commercial, and industrial buildings be designed to prevent wind tunnel effects around their base and in passageways. o Policy 10.10.6: Construct public infrastructure (lighting poles, street lights, bridges, etc.) to withstand extreme wind velocities in High Wind Hazard areas. o Policy 10.10.7: Maintain police, fire, medical, and other pertinent programs to respond to wind-caused emergencies. o Policy 10.10.8: Initiate a review of the wind hazard potential as it applies to various parts of the City and, if merited, tailor the design standards accordingly. 6-9 Implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-1 (Section 5-2, Air Quality) would reduce construction-related wind-blown dust impacts. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project would construct residential homes in an area exposed to high winds. Although the City of San Bernardino General Plan has not officially designated the Project site in the High Wind Area because they are not within the City limits, its location falls in line with areas along the foothills that have been designated in this area. (EIR at 5.6-14). Areas exposed to high winds can 121 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 893 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations potentially experience health and safety issues related, but not limited, to air quality, soil erosion, motor-vehicle accidents due to decreased visibility, wind-driven property damage, and exacerbation of fire hazards. (Id.) Project- related construction activities, particularly during site preparation such as grading, could potentially expose soils to wind erosion. This creates potential for windblown dust and soil to migrate offsite, adversely affecting adjacent properties during periods of high wind conditions. Furthermore, windblown dust, particularly during Santa Ana wind conditions, could reduce visibility along I-215, a heavily traveled highway approximately 0.7 mile southwest of the site, affecting travel and increasing the probability of motor-vehicle accidents. In addition to reduced visibility, high winds could also result in property damage and harm to surrounding residences from wind-driven debris picked up from loose onsite construction materials. (Id.) Winds would not only have the potential to impact the surrounding area during Project development, but also the proposed residences and land uses onsite. (EIR at 5.6-21). Winds have been measured and have the potential to reach in excess of 90 to 100 miles per hour. Winds at these speeds could potentially cause damage to the homes and land uses proposed on the Project site. Damage could be caused to roofs, fences, windows, and landscaping. Moreover, high winds are a main contributing factor for the high fire risk hazard in the area. (Id.) Santa Ana wind conditions significantly increase the fire hazard in the area when combined with the fuels present due to the low moisture content and low relative humidity. (Id.) Implementation of Mitigation Measures 6-8 and 6-9 will reduce impacts related to high winds to less than significant levels. c. Potential Significant Impact: Hazardous Emissions. The EIR evaluated and concluded that if the Project is built within the Southern California Edison 115 kV transmission lines remaining aboveground, the lines would potentially expose construction workers and residents to hazards of electric shock and/or electric and magnetic fields. Finding:Impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials are discussed in detail at Section 5.6 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant, but can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the implementation of Mitigation Measure 6-10. This mitigation measure is adopted and incorporated into the 122 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 894 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 6-10 If the project is built with the Southern California Edison 115 kV transmission lines remaining aboveground, the development plans shall be drawn to accommodate SCE safety measures including: o Operators of construction equipment with overhead lift capability, cranes, backhoes, and similar equipment shall abide by state safety clearances and undergo SCE- approved safety training, as needed, before operating the equipment onsite. o Near residences, a safety strip meeting SCE standards shall be required beside the SCE right-of-way. o Easements shall be employed as needed to prevent damage to the towers, shield residents from harm, and guarantee SCE maintenance access. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Preferred Development Plan assumes that the SCE overhead electric lines that traverse the western portion of the site would be located above-ground. (FEIR Figure 3-8). While consideration that the overhead electric lines may be undergrounded in considered in the Alternative Development Plan, undergrounding the size of SCE lines in question here is not currently feasible. The Preferred plan accommodates the lines above ground as proposed for the site.(FEIR Figure 3-8 and 3-8a). The Preferred Development Plan for Spring Trails is the same as the alternative plan in every respect, except for the treatment of the land beneath the aboveground electric lines and the number of residential lots. (Figure 3-8 and 3-8a). In the Preferred Development Plan, underneath the central portion of the electric line easement, the land use is designated as Open Space-Controlled. The northern portion of the electric line easement is designated as residential; however, development is not permitted within the electric line easement. (Id.). The SCE easement will be landscaped in accordance with the approved Fire Protection Plan for Spring Trails. If permitted by SCE, a park and/or equestrian/pedestrian trail may be located under the electric lines as a permitted use; however, they are not assumed in the design of the Preferred Development Plan. (Id.). The Preferred Development Plan and the Alternative Development Plan with underground electric lines presents potential hazards related to proximity to future residential uses: 123 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 895 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations o Although SCE makes provision for earthquakes in the design and construction of overhead transmission lines, extreme seismic shaking and earth rupture on the San Andreas fault may snap lines or topple towers, resulting in live power to the ground. o During construction, accidental contact with the towers or wires is possible. o Resident youths may be tempted to play on or climb the towers. o Residents may be exposed to electric and magnetic fields (EMF). (Id.). These lines would pose both construction and operational risks to workers or residents on the site. Contact with the wires by an elevated excavator arm, raised bucket, or other equipment designed for overhead work would have potentially fatal consequences. There is also the risk that residents may be tempted to climb on or vandalize the supporting towers. Though slight, the risk of electrical shock because of such activity does exist. Worker and residents would also be susceptible to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) because of the location of the lines on the project site. The SCE easement does not cross into the adjacent 26.4-acre area. (Id.). The Alternative Project proposes to relocate the 115 kV lines underground prior to site development; therefore, the risks associated with electrical shock and physical contact with the lines would be eliminated. If the 115kV lines cannot be relocated underground, then the Project would be built to accommodate the overhead electric lines, as described above. (FEIR at 3.3, Figure 3-8 and 3-8a). The concern with proximity to electric transmission lines is exposure of residents to electric and magnetic fields (EMFs). Since EMF emission is not reduced when transmission lines are undergrounded, this would be a concern in both development scenarios. (Id.). Over the past 30 years researchers have studied the potential effects of EMF exposure both nationally and internationally in an effort to determine whether EMF exposure is carcinogenic. EMFs are everywhere in modern society, and there is no evidence that living near electric transmission lines is any more detrimental to human health than living in a modern house. (Id.). Notwithstanding, Mitigation Measure 6-10 will be 124 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 896 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations incorporated to ensure that impacts related to the potential presence of overhead electric lines will be less than significant. 5.Land Use and Planning. a. Potential Significant Impact: Conflict with Habitat Conservation Plan. The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could conflict with the adopted U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Critical Habitat. Finding:Impacts related to Land Use and Planning are discussed in detail at Section 5.8 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant but can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the implementation of Mitigation Measure 3-2. This mitigation measure is adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 3-2 To mitigate for impacts to unoccupied critical habitat of the federally endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat, the project applicant shall acquire offsite permanent mitigation lands of like habitat quality as determined by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) during the Section 7 consultation process. Mitigation lands must be acquired prior to the issuance of grading permits, and shall incorporate appropriate long-term management provisions such as deed restrictions, endowments, and/or other management mechanisms to provide for the long-term conservation of the habitat. Potential properties include, but are not limited to, those managed by San Bernardino County Special Districts located in the Glen Helen, Rialto, and Rancho Cucamonga areas. Mitigation lands shall be acquired at a replacement ratio of 1:1 (one acre replaced for every one acre impacted). This measure does not preclude the imposition of additional mitigation requirements that may be initiated by the USFWS during the Section 7 consultation process. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Facts in Support of the Finding: Approximately 3.9 acres of habitat for this federally endangered species would be modified, which conflicts with the policies of the USFWS-designated critical habitat. (EIR at 5.8-47). No San Bernardino kangaroo rats have been observed on the Project site, but development of the area must follow the policies of the habitat plan. Portions of the secondary access road alignment at the southern end of the site are located within USFWS-designated critical habitat for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (see EIR Figure 5.3-4). Even though repeated surveys in the area have been negative for the presence of the San Bernardino 125 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 897 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations kangaroo rat, the presence of critical habitat requires consultation with the USFWS under Section 7 of Federal Endangered Species Act. The USFWS would impose mitigation to offset these impacts. (EIR at 5.8-47). In anticipation of those agency-imposed requirements, and as discussed previously, Mitigation Measure 3-2 has been incorporated into the Project to reduce the Project’s impacts in this regard to less than significant levels. 6.Public Services. a. Potential Significant Impact: Fire Protection and Emergency Services. The EIR evaluated and concluded that development of the Project could result in a substantial adverse physical impact associated with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection services. Finding:Impacts to Public Services are discussed in detail at Section 5.12 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant, as the Project will introduce 304 residences (reduced to 215 residences) and about 711 residents into a very high fire hazard severity zone in the San Bernardino County Fire services area, thereby increasing the requirement for fire protection facilities and personnel. However, this impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level through implementation of Mitigation Measure 12-1. This mitigation measure is adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 12-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall participate on a fair-share basis in funding the continued operation and maintenance of the Verdemont Fire Station. A one-time fair-share contribution equivalent to the Community Facilities District Number 1033 “in-lieu fee” established by Resolution Number 2004-107 of the Mayor and Common Council would mitigate the long-term impact of the project on emergency services of the Fire Department. As an alternative, an irrevocable agreement to annex the project site to Community Facilities District Number 1033 would satisfy this obligation. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project would include 304 homes (reduced to 215 units), four parks, and roadways for site and internal access to the roughly 350-acre Project site. The Project is expected to add about 711 residents to the site. (EIR at 5.12-3). 126 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 898 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Therefore, Project development is expected to result in an increase in calls for San Bernardino Fire Department (“SBFD”) fire and emergency medical services. At Project completion, SBFD response time to emergency calls to the farthest part of the site from the Verdemont Fire Station is expected to be 12 to 13 minutes. This is seven to eight minutes more than the standard SBFD response time of five minutes. After a reduction in staff from four to three firefighters, staffing at the station was recently restored to four firefighters. The addition of the Spring Trails development to the area served by the Verdemont Fire Station may result in increased demand on emergency fire services. (Id.). To offset the additional demand caused by new development projects, the City requires a fair-share contribution from new developments to help fund ongoing operation and maintenance of the Verdemont Fire Station. (EIR at 5.12-4). The response force (three fire engines, one aerial ladder truck, and a chief officer with a minimum of fifteen personnel) needed to effectively combat a structure fire would need to be capable of being assembled at points within the Project site. The third engine and aerial ladder truck to complete an effective response would come from a station farther away: from Fire Station 227 at 282 West 40th Street (6.75 miles from Project entrance) or from SBCoFD Station 2 in Devore (3.75 miles from project entrance). San Bernardino County Fire Department Station 2 has daily staffing of three full-time firefighters supplemented by a company of paid call firefighters as needed, and is equipped with one type 1 (structure) engine, one type 3 (wildland) engine, and one type 5 patrol vehicle. (Id.). While the San Bernardino County station is physically closer, additional time and effort would be required to coordinate with the County, which could delay the response. Either would come with a minimum of three firefighters. The aerial ladder truck, with four firefighters, would come from Fire Station 224 located at 2641 E Street (7.85 miles from Project entrance. (EIR Figure 5.12-1). A fire battalion chief would also be dispatched. In the event of a major wildfire on or threatening the site, additional firefighting resources would be brought to the area. Other City fire stations would respond as needed. (EIR at 5.12-4). The SBFD has five type 3 (wildland) engines, which are deployed at Fire Stations 225, 226, 227, 228, and 323. The three closest fire stations to this Project have wildland engines. In addition, there is a county/CAL 127 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 899 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations FIRE station nearby in Lytle Creek (Fire Station 20) and a new county fire station will be built as part of a new development in the southern Lytle Creek area, south of the Glen Helen Regional Park in Devore. (Id.). The new station is dependent on development in the area and may be delayed with changes in the housing market. Vegetation fires result in a multiagency response, which would include CAL FIRE and the USFS. A fire protection/fuel modification plan has been required for the Project. (EIR Appendix G). The fire plan is designed to reduce the risks related to the high fire potential of the site. Topography, vegetative, weather, and structural components were used to analyze the setting and provide measures for reducing risks. It also meets the fire safety standards of the Foothill Fire Zone Overlay District (FF District) Standards (Chapter 15.10 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code), Building Safety Enhancement Area Building Standards (Chapter 15.11 Municipal Code), City of San Bernardino Development Code (Chapter 19.15), and City Fire Code (Chapter 15.16). The fire protection plan divides the Project site into three zones, Fuel Modification Zone A (flat, noncombustible construction), Fuel Modification Zone B (wet zone, 100 percent removal of undesirable plant species), and Fuel Modification Zone C (dry zone, 50 percent thinning of the native shrubs). (EIR Figures 5.6- 1and 5.6-2). The fire protection plan also includes vegetation management guidelines, the allowed and undesirable plant palettes, planting maintenance and spacing guidelines, a construction management plan, infrastructure/structural construction features and requirements, and a compliance matrix to be used by the developer, residents, and the homeowners association of Spring Trails to reduce fire risks. The minimum fire flow required for this project is 1,500 gallons per minute (gpm) at 20 pounds per square inch (psi) pressure for a minimum duration of four hours. Fire hydrants are required at a spacing of no more than 300 feet. (EIR at 5.12-4). Water for fire flow would be provided by expanding and improving the offsite water system, and by onsite reservoirs and transmission lines. (EIR Figures 3-10 and 3-11). The Project would use infrastructure at pressure zones at elevations of 2,100 feet, 2,300 feet, 2,500 feet, 2,700 feet, and 3,000 feet. The Project site falls in the 2,300, 2,500, 2,700, and 3,000 zones. Fire-flow storage required for each of the three onsite pressure zones is 360,000 gallons. (EIR at 5.12-7). Project water system improvements would be 128 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 900 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations sized to provide required fire flow in addition to meeting project water demands. Pumping stations would be designed with 100 percent redundancy in the event that one or more of the pumping units fails, and equipped with onsite generators that can operate in a blackout or emergency condition. (Id.). Implementation of Mitigation Measure 12-1 will reduce impacts to fire protection and emergency services to a less than significant level. 7.Traffic and Circulation. a. Potential Significant Impact: Substantial Increase in Traffic. The EIR evaluated and concluded that development of the Project could cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections). Finding:Impacts to Traffic and Circulation are discussed in detail at Section 5.8 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant, because the Project would generate 3,149 average daily trips, 247 morning peak hour, and 333 evening peak hour trips to the Project area, thereby contributing to existing and future unacceptable levels of service at the Palm Avenue/I-215 ramps intersections and at the Palm Avenue/Kendall Drive intersection. However, these impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level through implementation of Mitigation Measures 14-1 to 14-4. These mitigation measures are adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 14-1 If at the time combustible materials are placed on the project site the Palm Avenue/Kendall Drive intersection has not been improved, the project shall be responsible for funding and constructing the dual westbound left turn lane intersection improvements at Palm Avenue/ Kendall Drive. All improvements to this intersection must be completed to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works/Civil Engineering prior to issuance of occupancy permits. 14-2 The easterly (primary) project access road between Little League Drive and the project site shall be constructed and paved to meet the City of San Bernardino Fire Department’s minimum standards prior to placement of combustible materials on the project site. The access road shall be designed and constructed to meet the City of San Bernardino Public Works/Engineering Division’s design standards prior to issuance of occupancy permits. 129 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 901 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Concurrently, the segment of Little League Drive north of Meyers Road shall be improved to Public Works Department design standards. 14-3 The westerly (secondary) project access road shall be constructed and paved to meet the City of San Bernardino Fire Department’s minimum standards prior to placement of combustible materials on the project site. The access road shall be designed and constructed to meet the City of San Bernardino Public Works/Engineering Division’s design standards prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. 14-4 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall prepare a construction traffic plan that shall be approved by the City of San Bernardino Public Works/Engineering Division. The construction traffic plan shall:  Prohibit project construction traffic from using the Kendall Drive/Palm Avenue intersection during the morning peak hour (7:00 AM and 9:00 AM) and the evening peak hour (4:00 PM and 6:00 PM)  Establish truck haul routes on the appropriate transportation facilities.  Provide Traffic Control Plans (for detours and temporary road closures) that meet the minimum Caltrans, City, and County criteria.  Minimize offsite road closures during the peak hours.  Keep all construction-related traffic onsite at all times. Facts in Support of the Finding: The City of San Bernardino has an acceptable intersection Level of Service (“LOS”) standard of D or better. All area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable LOS. (EIR Table 5.14-2). Operational Phase: Spring Trails would include the development of 304 single-family detached houses (reduced to 215 units), with the final phase of construction to be completed by year 2013. (EIR at 5.14-42). The analysis in this report quantifies the impacts of 329 single- family units, and therefore slightly overstates the actual impact anticipated for the 304-unit (now 215-unit) single- family residential development. The traffic generated by Spring Trails would increase the number of trips on local roadways and freeways, thereby worsening the LOS on these systems. (Id.). The following intersections would operate at unacceptable levels of service during AM and PM peak hours: 130 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 902 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations o I-215 northbound ramps and Palm Avenue; o I-215 southbound ramps and Palm Avenue; o Palm Avenue and Kendall Drive Without roadway improvements, these Project area intersections would have unacceptable levels of service (E or worse). (EIR at 5.14-43). However, interchange improvements to the Palm Avenue and I-215 ramps intersection are included in the SANBAG Nexus Study funded by the City of San Bernardino Regional Circulation System Fee. (Id.). These improvements would improve the LOS to B during morning peak hour traffic on the northbound ramp, to D during evening peak hour traffic on the northbound ramp, and to C during both morning and evening peak hour traffic on southbound ramps. Development impact fees paid by the Project applicant would contribute to the Regional Circulation System Fee. Improvements to the Palm Avenue/Kendall Drive intersection are not included in a City plan or program. (Id.). If the necessary improvements to this intersection are not in place at the time the Spring Trails Project is completed, a significant impact would result. Construction Phase: Construction traffic would contribute to deficiencies at the Palm Avenue/I-215 northbound and southbound ramps intersections during morning and evening peak hours (7:00 to 9:00 AM and 4:00 to 6:00 PM respectively), resulting in a significant impact. (Id.). However, implementation of Mitigation Measures 14-1 to 14-4 will reduce impacts to less than significant during both the operational and construction phases of the Project. 8.Utilities and Service Systems. a. Potential Significant Impact: Construction of New Water or Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The EIR evaluated and concluded that development of the Project would require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects; and would not have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, and new and/or expanded entitlements would be needed. 131 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 903 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding:Impacts to Utilities and Service Systems are discussed in detail at Section 5.15 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant, because the Project would use 529 acre-feet of water per year (“AFY”), 79 AFY more than the 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (“UWMP”) projections, thus increasing water demand on the San Bernardino Basin, and requiring the construction of additional water distribution infrastructure, including reservoirs, pump stations, and water mainlines that are not part of a Capital Improvements Plan. Note that water demand and wastewater generation will be less than discussed in this finding based on reducing the size of the project from 307 units to 215 units. However, these impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level through implementation of Mitigation Measure 15-1. This mitigation measure is adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: 15-1 Completion of the Phase II Verdemont water delivery infrastructure improvements shall be verified by the SBMWD prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Spring Trails. The offsite improvements as shown in Table 5.15-13, include the east reservoir, east pump station, and east 20-inch transmission main. The project applicant shall contribute fair- share funding for the improvements through development impact fees or through an alternate financial arrangement with the SBMWD. A funding and phasing program for the improvements shall be in-place (e.g., Capital Improvements Program) or negotiated with the project applicant prior to issuance of building permits. Facts in Support of the Finding: Although the Project site would be designated as Residential Low in the General Plan, water demand for the Project site is based on average density over the entire Project site area (350 acres). Considering the overall Spring Trails development of 304 residential dwelling units on 350 acres of land (note this has been reduced to 215 units at this time), the average parcel size for the entire development is estimated at 0.87 units per acre. (EIR at 5.15-12). Proposed development plans indicate that individual parcels would range in size from 10,000 to over 600,000 square feet, averaging 27,337 square feet or 0.62 acres. Hence, this development would fall under the Residential Estate category with an average water demand of 0.93 gpm per acre. (Id.). Based on a total development of 353 acres, rather than 85 percent buildout under the existing General Plan, the average annual water demand is estimated at 328 gpm, or 529 afy. (EIR Table 5.15-10). The assumptions made by the City’s General Plan for residential land uses of the Project site were used in determining water demand in the 2005 UWMP. (EIR Table 5.15-8). The UWMP assumes a demand of 450 afy for the Project site. The 132 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 904 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations projected water demands of the Spring Trails Project are higher by 79 afy (17.5 percent). (EIR Table 5.15-11). The two projected water demands assume that buildout of the site under either the Spring Trails or General Plan projection would occur at the same time. (EIR at 5.15-13). Maximum daily demand flows can be used to determine the amount of onsite water storage needed for the Project. During days of high demand and peak hours, the water demand for the site would increase. Between average days and high demand days, the gpm rate would increase by a factor of 1.73, resulting in a total rate of 568 gpm on high demand days. Between high demand days and peak hours, the gpm rate would increase by a factor of 2, resulting in a peak hour demand rate of 1,136 gpm. (Id.). Spring Trails would require the construction of new water supply infrastructure. SBMWD has begun planning for infrastructure expansion in the Verdemont area that would accommodate Spring Trails. This expansion, the Verdemont infrastructure improvements, would occur in two phases and is needed to serve the 2,300- foot pressure zone. These improvements were analyzed for environmental impacts in 2007. A mitigated negative declaration was approved by the SBMWD Board of Water Commissioners in April of 2007. Funding for these improvements was approved by the City, is included in SBMWD’s Capital Improvements Program, and is incorporated into the 2009–2010 City budget. (EIR at 5.15-14). The second phase for the Verdemont infrastructure improvements would connect the 2,100-foot pressure zone to the 2,300-foot pressure zone and is necessary to bring water supply to the Spring Trails site. These improvements would be required for supplying water and maintaining appropriate water storage for the Spring Trails project. Currently, there is no funding planned for these improvements. (EIR at 5.15-15). In addition to the proposed Verdemont infrastructure improvements, the Spring Trails plan includes onsite infrastructure improvements to be completed by the developer. (EIR Figure 3-10). The onsite improvements would need to be constructed and funded by the developer prior to the development of the site. (EIR at 5.15-15). The pipelines within the development are considered distribution lines for all practical purposes. The pipelines that connect pump 133 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 905 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations stations to the reservoirs would be a minimum of 20 inches in diameter. (Id.). All looping lines would be 12 inches in diameter and other distribution pipelines would be 8 inches in diameter. The Phase I and Phase II improvements would need to be included in the SBMWD Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) and incorporated into the City’s budget. Phase I improvements were included in the 2009–2010 City Budget, but the Phase II improvements were not. (Id.). Funding for the offsite improvements in the CIP would come from developer impact fees, which would be paid in part (fair share) by the developer. The existing and planned infrastructure would have enough capacity to support the Project. (Id.). Fire flow for Spring Trails would need to meet a requirement of 1,500 gpm with a four-hour duration, as indicated by the San Bernardino Fire Department. SBMWD would be able to meet this demand once the proposed infrastructure in the 2,300-foot zone is completed. The same pipelines that would supply the site with domestic water would also be used for fire suppression through connections with fire hydrants. (EIR at 5.15-16). 2009 was the third consecutive drought year for California, and the impacts were seen through changes to water allocations of SWP water. (Id.). In April 2011, CDWR increased water allocations to 80 percent of the requested amounts. SBVMWD, the SWP contractor for the San Bernardino Valley, is included on this list of contractors and should receive 82,080 acre-feet in 2011, 80 percent of its entitlement. Projected SWP reliability throughout future years is uncertain. (Id.). Ultimate contract amounts total 4.2 million afy, but yearly deliveries are only a fraction of this amount. SBMWD and other water agencies reliant on some portion of SWP water should reduce their dependence on this source of water and focus on alternative technologies, conservation efforts, and storage activities to guarantee water supply in the future. The BHG Basin is the most important source of water for the SBMWD. Approximately 1.5 million acre-feet of groundwater in the basin is extractable. (Id.). In 2008, the cumulative change in groundwater storage since 1934 was a negative 354,595 acre-feet. (EIR Table 5.15-2). The last year the basin had a positive cumulative change was 1998 (74,083 afy). The increasing urban growth in the San Bernardino Valley would only create a greater demand on the BHG Basin 134 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 906 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations water supply; water levels are most likely to continue dropping unless greater conservation efforts are enforced. (EIR at 5.15-17). Spring Trails Specific Plan includes a number of design guidelines and practices that would improve onsite water conservation. (Id.). Some of these guidelines and practices include: o Required diversion of stormwater runoff into onsite detention basins to enable recharge; o Recommended collection of rainwater and additional stormwater runoff by diverting runoff to pervious surfaces or bioswales to reduce unnecessary runoff; o Required use of high efficiency, xeriscape irrigation systems to reduce the amount of water devoted to landscaped areas; o Includes bubbler irrigation and low-angle, low-flow nozzles on spray heads; o Required installation of properly programmed EvapoTranspiration-based controllers on homeowners’ properties with the appropriate information for the homeowners; o Required installation of motion sensors and other similar irrigation technology to ensure that landscaping is watered only as needed; o Required planting of plant species that are drought tolerant, heat resistant, and hardy; o Prohibition of the use of large turf areas in landscaping by substituting water-conserving native groundcovers or perennial grasses, shrubs, and trees; o Recommended construction of trails with pervious materials such as earth or decomposed granite; o Required grouping of plants with similar water requirements together, a technique known as hydrozoning; o Recommended mulching of planting beds and apply compost and environmentally friendly fertilizers to promote healthy topsoil, maximize plant growth, reduce plant replacement, and reduce the need for longer or more frequent irrigation run times. The following practices are recommended for buildings: 135 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 907 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations o Required installation of water-efficient faucets and appliances in residences; o Required installation of sensor-operated faucets in nonresidential buildings; o Recommended use of toilets that use less than 1.6 gallons per flush, waterless urinals in nonresidential buildings, and faucets and showerheads that use less than 2.5 gallons per minute. The implementation of these practices would help to reduce the amount of water by reducing the water used by each residence and through controlling water loss in public areas by using water-smart landscaping and reclamation techniques. (EIR at 5.15-18). In sum, the required funding by the Applicant of the Phase II Verdemont infrastructure improvements prior to issuance of occupancy permits, as required by Mitigation Measure 15-1, will reduce impacts in this area to less than significant. 9.Forest Resources. a. Potential Significant Impact: Loss of Forest Land. The EIR evaluated and concluded that development of the Project would result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use; or involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of forest land to non- forest use. Finding:Impacts to Forest Resources are discussed in detail at Section 5.17 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact is potentially significant, because the Project would remove 220 native trees, requiring replacement of trees per the City’s tree ordinance. However, these impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level through implementation of Mitigation Measure 3-13 for Biological Resources, as described above. This mitigation measure is adopted and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein, thereby reducing this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level: Facts in Support of the Finding: Implementation of the Project would involve the removal of approximately 2,400 trees within the development 136 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 908 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations footprint. Approximately 220 of these are native species and 2,170 are eucalyptus. (EIR at 5.17-5). The areas of Cable Creek, Cable Canyon, and Meyer Creek contain the majority of native trees and are considered forest land. (EIR Table 5.3-3). However, the Project would be required to comply with the City’s Tree Ordinance, which would require replacement of any removed native trees. (EIR at 5.17-5). Native species of trees within this affected area would have the potential to be impacted by development from direct removal of forest resources and indirectly from forest resources removed as a result of fuel modification activities. Areas within Fuel Modification Zone B would require removal of all undesirable plant species, while areas within Zone A would require a 50 percent thinning of native species. (EIR at 5.17-6). The City’s Tree Ordinance requires that “significant” trees be mitigated. In determining what constitutes a significant tree, the initial arborist report prepared for the Project determined that healthy, structurally sound native and ornamental trees over 20 feet in height would be considered significant. (Id.). Approximately 220 trees on the site met these criteria during the 1998 tree inventory. Thus, the removal of these trees during Project development would be considered a potentially significant impact and thus subject to the requirements of the City’s Tree Ordinance. To ensure that removed native trees are adequately replaced and to comply with the City’s Tree Ordinance, impacts to forest resources are considered potentially significant without incorporation of Mitigation Measure 3-13. (Id.). Eucalyptus trees present a particular problem for this site because they are nonnative and a severe fire hazard. (Id.). Eucalyptus can also be considered an invasive species. They were formerly included on List A of invasive species by the California Exotic Pest Plant Council (CalEPPC). List A of the Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern in California consists of the most invasive wildland pest plants, documented as aggressive invaders that displace natives and disrupt natural habitats. The list highlights the nonnative plants that are serious problems in wildlands such as national forests. (Id.). The Project site shares its northern border with the San Bernardino National Forests and the eucalyptus trees are a potential threat to native plant communities in the national forest. The 1999 CalEPPC exotic pest plant list was updated by the California Invasive Plant Council in 2006, and the status of 137 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 909 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations blue gum eucalyptus changed to “moderate.” The USDA Forest Service identifies the blue gum eucalyptus as highly flammable and recommends the tree not be planted near homes and other structures. (Id.). Lastly, Section 12220(g) of the PRC defines “forest land" as land that can support 10 percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits. (EIR at 5.17-7). The land where the eucalyptus trees are currently located cannot be identified as forest land because it cannot and has not supported 10 percent native tree cover. Furthermore, Section 4793(f) of the PRC defines "forest land conservation measures" as measures designed to protect, maintain, or enhance the forest resource system, including soil and watershed values, diversity of forest species, and protection of a forest stand from fire. (Id.). These measures include thinning, shaded fuel breaks, and other land treatments or forest resource improvement projects consistent with PRC Section 4794. Based on these considerations, the removal of the eucalyptus from the Project site can be considered an overall benefit in protecting the adjacent native forest stands from fire and in maintaining a diversity of native species; therefore, it is a less than significant impact to forest resources. With incorporation of Mitigation Measure 3-13, impacts to native trees will also be less than significant. C.Impacts Analyzed in the EIR and Determined to be Significant and Unavoidable. With the implementation of all available and feasible mitigation measures recommended in the EIR, the following adverse impacts of the Project stated below are considered to be significant and unavoidable, based upon information in the EIR and in the administrative record. These impacts are considered significant and unavoidable despite the imposed mitigation measures, which will reduce impacts to the extent feasible. 1.Air Quality. a. Conflict With Air Quality Plan-Construction. Potentially Significant Impact:The EIR concluded that the Project will conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (“AQMP”) because construction-related 138 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 910 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations air pollutant emissions would exceed the SCAQMD regional and local emission thresholds. Finding:Impacts related to Air Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.2 of the Draft EIR. Mitigation measures applied for short-term construction activities of the Project would lessen impacts from construction-related air pollutant emissions. However, based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this conflict with the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan is potentially significant and cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of mitigation measures. Accordingly, the potential for the Project to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan remains significant and unavoidable. The following mitigation measures will mitigate impacts to Air Quality to the extent feasible: 2-1 Ongoing during grading and construction, the construction contractor shall implement the following measures in addition to the existing requirements for fugitive dust control under South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 to further reduce PM10 and PM2.5 emissions. To assure compliance, the City shall verify that these measures have been implemented during normal construction site inspections:  During all grading activities, the construction contractor shall reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering as quickly as possible. This would achieve a minimum control efficiency for PM10 of 5 percent.  During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall sweep streets with Rule 1186–compliant, PM10-efficient vacuum units on a daily basis if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling.  During active debris removal and grading, the construction contractor shall suspend grading operations when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour. This would achieve an emissions control efficiency of 98 percent for PM10 under worst-case wind conditions.  During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard on trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials and tarp materials with a fabric cover or other suitable means. This would achieve a control efficiency for PM10 of 91 percent.  During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces and disturbed areas a minimum of every three hours on the construction site and a minimum of three times per day. This would achieve an emissions reduction control efficiency for PM10 of 61 percent. 139 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 911 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations  During active debris removal, the construction contractor shall apply water to disturbed soils at the end of each day. This would achieve an emissions control efficiency for PM10 of 10 percent.  During all construction activities, the construction contractor shall limit onsite vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to no more than 15 miles per hour. This would achieve a control efficiency for PM10 of 57 percent.  The construction contractor shall apply chemical soil stabilizers to reduce wind erosion. This would achieve a control efficiency of up to 80 percent. 2-2 2-3 During all grading activities, the daily area disturbed shall be limited to a maximum of 35 acres. Ongoing during grading and construction, the construction contractor shall implement the following measures to further reduce construction exhaust emissions of NOx. To assure compliance, the City shall verify that these measures have been implemented during normal construction site inspections:  The Project Applicant shall specify in the construction bid that construction contractors are required to use construction equipment rated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as having Tier 3 or higher exhaust emission limits for equipment over 50 horsepower. A list of construction equipment by type and model year shall be maintained by the construction contractor onsite.  The construction contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is properly serviced and maintained to the manufacturer’s standards to reduce operational emissions.  The construction contractor shall limit nonessential idling of construction equipment to no more than five consecutive minutes. Facts in Support of the Finding: There are two key indicators of a project’s consistency with an AQMP: 1) Whether the project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of the AAQS or interim emission reductions in the AQMP; and 2) Whether the project would exceed the assumptions in the AQMP. The AQMP strategy is, in part, based on projections from local general plans. (EIR at 5.2-12). Long-term emissions from the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for regional emissions (EIR Table 5.2-8) and would therefore not contribute to an increase in frequency or severity of air quality violations and delay attainment of the AAQS or interim emission reductions in the AQMP. Therefore, the 140 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 912 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Project’s operation-related emissions result in a less than significant air quality impact. Thus, the Project would be consistent with the AQMP under the first indicator with regard to long-term emissions. (Id.). However, with respect to short-term emissions, this Project would not be consistent with the AQMP under the first indicator, because short-term construction emissions of NO , PM , and PM 2.5 X 10 associated with the project would exceed the SCAQMD regional and localized significance thresholds, which are the basis for determining if a project would cumulatively contribute to the regional nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin. (See EIR Table 5.2-7). The South Coast Air Basin is designated by the state and EPA as nonattainment for O3, PM , and PM . (EIR at 5.2-12).10 2.5 The Project would be considered consistent with the AQMP under the second indicator, because the proposed development under the Spring Trails Specific Plan is consistent with the City of San Bernardino General Plan, and thus would not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP, which is based in part, on local general plan projections. (EIR at 5.2-14). However, since both indicators would not be met, both Project and cumulative level impacts are considered significant and unavoidable, due to the Project’s inconsistency with the AQMP. b.Cumulatively Considerable Increase of Criteria Pollutant- Construction. Potentially Significant Impact:The EIR concluded that the Project’s construction activities will result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the Project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Finding:Impacts related to Air Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.2 of the Draft EIR. Specifically, the Project will generate short-term emissions that exceed SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds for NOx, PM , and PM , and102.5 would significantly contribute to the nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin for ozone and particulate matter (PM and PM ). Fugitive dust102.5 mitigation measures applied for short-term construction activities of the Project would lessen impacts from construction-related air pollutant emissions. However, based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of mitigation measures. Accordingly, the potential for the Project to result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the Project region is non-attainment remains significant and unavoidable. Mitigation 141 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 913 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Measures 2-1 to 2-3 (listed above) will mitigate Air Quality impacts related to criteria pollutants to the extent feasible. Facts in Support of the Finding: Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources, such as onsite heavy-duty construction vehicles, vehicles hauling materials to and from the site, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Grading activities produce fugitive dust emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) from soil-disturbing activities. (EIR at 5.2-15). Exhaust emissions from construction activities onsite would vary daily as construction activity levels change. Construction activities associated with new development occurring in the Project area would temporarily increase localized PM , PM , VOC, NOx, and CO concentrations102.5 in the Project vicinity and regional emissions within the South Coast Air Basin. (Id.). The primary source of construction-related CO, SOx, VOC, and NOx emissions is gasoline- and diesel-powered heavy-duty mobile construction equipment. Primary sources of PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would be clearing activities, excavation and grading operations, construction vehicle traffic on unpaved ground, and wind blowing over exposed earth surfaces. In addition, architectural coating operations can also generate substantial VOC emissions. Project-related construction air pollutant emissions would occur from construction of the Project. Emissions from construction activities were calculated on a daily basis and were compared to the SCAQMD’s maximum daily regional emissions thresholds, which revealed that grading activities would result in air pollutant emissions that exceed the SCAQMD regional significance thresholds for NOx, PM10, and PM2.5. (EIR Table 5.2-7). All other analyzed pollutants were found to be less than the SCAQMD’s significance thresholds. The primary source of NOx emissions would be from construction equipment exhaust during grading operations. NOx is a precursor to both the formation of O3 and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). The primary sources of PM10 and PM2.5 would be fugitive dust during grading and clearing during these operations. Emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 that exceed the SCAQMD’s regional significance threshold would significantly contribute to the particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin. Consequently, emissions of NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 that exceed the SCAQMD regional significance thresholds would significantly contribute to the O3 and particulate 142 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 914 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations matter (PM and PM ) nonattainment designations of the102.5 South Coast Air Basin. (EIR at 5.2-15). Both Project and cumulative level impacts would be significant relative to the Project’s consistency with the SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds for NOx, PM , and PM , and the102.5 Project’s contribution to the nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin for ozone and particulate matter (PM and PM ).10 2.5 Mitigation Measures 2-1 and 2-2 would reduce PM10 and PM2.5 emissions from Project-related construction activities to below the SCAQMD regional thresholds. Similarly, Mitigation Measure 2-3 would reduce NOx emissions during construction activities by approximately 31 percent or approximately 149 pounds per day. (EIR at 5.2-30). However, NOx emissions from Project-related construction activities would continue to exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds. (EIR Table 5.2-13). Consequently, Project and cumulative level impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. c.Exposure of Sensitive Receptors-Construction. Potential Significant Impact:The EIR concluded that the Project’s construction activities will expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Finding:Impacts related to Air Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.2 of the Draft EIR. Specifically, the Project’s construction activities could expose offsite sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations of PM10 and could expose the existing onsite receptor to substantial pollutant concentrations of both PM10 and PM2.5. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of mitigation measures. Accordingly, the potential for the Project’s construction activities to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations remains significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measures 2-1 to 2- 3 (listed above) will reduce the concentration of air pollutants at nearby sensitive land uses to the extent feasible. Facts in Support of the Finding: Project emissions would exceed the screening level criteria for LSTs of NOx, PM10 and PM2.5 during Project-related grading activities. (EIR Table 5.2-9). The maximum emissions of CO from Project-related construction activities would not exceed the LST screening level criterion, and would therefore not result in substantial CO 143 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 915 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations pollutant concentrations at nearby sensitive receptors. (EIR at 5.2-16). Because emissions of NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 would exceed the LST screening level criteria for a five-acre site during grading operations, concentrations generated by Project- related construction activities during grading were modeled at nearby sensitive receptors surrounding the site. (EIR at 5.2-17). The maximum concentrations for NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 would occur during the overlap of mass grading and trenching operations. (See EIR Figures 5.2-1 through 5.2-3). The highest concentration of NOx offsite is 120 μg/m3. (EIR Figure 5.2-1). However, the offsite areas that would be exposed to this concentration level do not have any sensitive receptors. (EIR at 5.2-18). This concentration, when converted to parts per million (ppm), would result in a concentration level of approximately 0.1 ppm. At the highest concentration, construction-related emissions of NOx would not exceed the LST of 0.18 ppm. Additionally, areas with elevated NOx concentrations would occur primarily in the southern portion of the Project site and therefore the existing onsite residence would not be exposed to elevated levels of NOx. Therefore, Project- related construction activities would not expose off- and onsite sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations of NOx. (Id.). The concentration of PM2.5 would be below the LSTs at the surrounding offsite receptors, but would exceed the LSTs at the existing onsite receptor. (EIR Figure 5.2-3). In addition, construction activities would generate substantial concentrations of PM10 at the existing onsite residence and the surrounding offsite receptors. (EIR Figure 5.2-2). Consequently, the Project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 during grading activities, with Project level impacts being potentially significant. Mitigation Measures 2-1 through 2-3 would reduce regional construction emissions and therefore reduce localized concentrations of air pollutant emissions during construction activities. With the implementation of mitigation, construction emissions of NOX would be reduced to below the LST screening level criteria; however, PM10 and PM2.5 would continue to exceed the LST screening level criteria. (EIR Table 5.2-14). 144 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 916 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Implementation of Mitigation Measures 2-1 and 2-2 would reduce the concentration of PM10 and PM2.5 at the existing sensitive receptors. (EIR Figures 5.2-4 and 5.2-5). The concentration of PM2.5 would fall below the AAQS, and therefore localized air quality impacts from construction- related PM2.5 would be reduced to less than significant. The concentration of PM10 would also be reduced to below the AAQS at the offsite receptors. However, concentrations of PM10 would continue to exceed the AAQS at the existing onsite receptor. Consequently, even with incorporation of mitigation measures, PM10 generated during grading activities would continue to exceed the AAQS, and therefore generate substantial concentrations of air pollutants at sensitive receptors, resulting in a significant and unavoidable Project-level impact for PM10. d. Potential Significant Impact: Cumulative Impacts-Construction. The EIR concluded that the Project’s contribution to cumulative construction-related air quality impacts would be significant. Finding:Impacts related to Air Quality are discussed in detail in Section 5.2 of the Draft EIR. Specifically, the Project’s contribution to cumulative construction-related air quality impacts would be significant. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that this impact cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of mitigation measures. Accordingly, the potential for the Project to contribute to cumulative construction-related air quality impacts remains significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measures 2-1 to 2-3 (listed above) will reduce the concentration of air pollutants at nearby sensitive land uses to the extent feasible. Facts in Support of the Finding: The South Coast Air Basin is in nonattainment for O3 and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). (EIR at 5.2-27). Construction of cumulative Projects will further degrade the regional and local air quality. Air quality will be temporarily impacted during construction activities. Mitigation Measures 2-1 to 2-3 would assist in mitigating these cumulative impacts, and can be applied to all similar cumulative projects. However, even with the implementation of mitigation measures, Project-related construction emissions would still exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds for NOx, PM10 and PM2.5, and cumulative emissions would result in greater exceedances. Therefore, the Project’s contribution to cumulative 145 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 917 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations construction-related air quality impacts will remain significant and unavoidable. (Id.). 2.Noise. a.Substantial Temporary or Periodic Increase in Ambient Noise. Significant Unavoidable Impact: The EIR concluded that the Project will cause a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Finding:Impacts related to Noise are discussed in detail in Section 5.10 of the Draft EIR. Mitigation measures applied for construction activities of the Project would lessen noise impacts. However, based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that construction activities will substantially elevate the ambient noise environment at noise-sensitive uses for a substantial period of time, and cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of mitigation measures. Accordingly, the potential for the Project to cause a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project remains significant and unavoidable. The following mitigation measures will mitigate construction noise impacts to the extent feasible: 10-1 The construction contractor shall properly maintain and tune all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions. 10-2 The construction contractor shall fit all equipment with properly operating mufflers, air intake silencers, and engine shrouds no less effective than as originally equipped by the manufacturer. 10-3 The construction contractor shall locate all stationary noise sources (e.g., generators, compressors, staging areas) as far from offsite residential receptor locations as is feasible. 10-4 Construction activities, including haul trucks and deliveries, shall be limited to between 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM Monday through Saturdays, except on federal holidays. 10-5 The project applicant shall post a sign, clearly visible onsite, with a contact name and telephone number of the project applicant’s authorized representative to respond in the event of a noise complaint. 10-6 The construction contractor shall install temporary sound blankets at least six feet in height along the boundaries of the onsite residence. 146 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 918 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Finding: Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during construction: First, the transport of workers and movement of materials to and from the site could incrementally increase noise levels along local access roads; and/or short- term noise impacts could occur during site preparation, grading, and/or physical construction. (EIR at 5.10-30). Mitigation Measures 10-1 through 10-6 would reduce noise generated by construction activities to the extent feasible. However, due to the number of soil haul trips that would be required, amount of heavy construction equipment needed, and duration of construction activities, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. (Id.). The transport of workers and equipment to the construction site would incrementally increase noise levels along site access roadways. Even though there would be a relatively high single-event noise exposure potential with passing trucks, the expected number of workers and trucks is small relative to the background traffic. Truck trips would be spread throughout the workday. (Id.). Therefore, these impacts are less than significant at noise receptors along the construction routes. However, the number of truck trips associated with soil haul operations would be high, and would increase the number of trucks on the local roadways during construction of the access roads due to amount of soil that would be transported. While truck trips associated with soil haul operations would last for only a three-month period, as shown in the table, soil haul trips would substantially increase the ambient noise environment along the roadway. (EIR Table 5.10-11). Consequently, truck trips associated with soil haul operations would result in significant noise impacts for the noise-sensitive uses along the roadway during grading activities. (EIR at 5.10-30). Onsite project-related construction noise would generate noise levels ranging from 45 dBA Leq to 91 dBA Leq at the surrounding noise-sensitive receptors and between 73 dBA Leq to 80 dBA Leq at the existing onsite residence. (EIR Table 5.10-12). Average noise levels would be lower than maximum noise levels, and would range from 38 dBA Leq to 70 dBA Leq at the nearby offsite noise-sensitive receptors and 53 dBA Leq to 60 dBA Leq at the existing onsite residence. (EIR Table 5.10-13). Roadway-related construction noise would generate noise levels ranging from 50 dBA Leq to 88 dBA Leq at the surrounding noise- sensitive receptors. (EIR Table 5.10-14). Average noise 147 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 919 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations levels of each construction phase would be lower than maximum noise levels, and would range from 45 dBA Leq to 65 dBA Leq at the nearby noise-sensitive receptors. (EIR Table 5.10-15). Construction activities would elevate ambient noise levels during the daytime at the residences surrounding the Project site and the proposed access roadways. (EIR at 5.10-35). The City allows for noise from construction activities, but limits it to the least noise- sensitive portions of the day. The Project would comply with the City’s Municipal Code, as specified in Section 8.54.070. Construction activities would not occur in the evening or late-night hours when people are more sensitive to noise. (Id.). While maximum construction-generated noise would substantially increase the ambient noise environment, average construction-generated noise levels (i.e., noise levels that would be experienced by noise- sensitive receptors the majority of the time) would be much lower. Construction of the offsite portions of the access roads would last approximately three to six months; however, overall project-related construction activities would take approximately three years to complete. (Id.). Because of the extended duration of construction activities and intensity of noise produced from heavy construction equipment running continuously,project-related construction activities would result in significant noise impacts at the surrounding existing residential uses. 3.Traffic. a. Exceed Level of Service Standard. Significant Unavoidable Impact: The EIR concluded that the Project will exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. Finding:Impacts related to Traffic are discussed in detail in Section 5.14 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that Project-related trip generation in combination with existing and proposed cumulative development would result in designated roads and/or highways exceeding the San Bernardino Association of Governments’ Congestion Management Plan (“CMP”) service standards. No funding program is currently available for the proposed Caltrans/SANBAG I-215 and I-15 freeway mainline improvements, and no mitigation measures are available to reduce this impact. Accordingly, the potential for the Project to exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion 148 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 920 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations management agency for designated roads or highways remains significant and unavoidable. Facts in Support of the Finding: The traffic analysis for Spring Trails was completed in accordance with the definition of deficiency of the San Bernardino County CMP. (EIR at 5.14-43). For freeway facilities, the definition of deficiency is based on maintaining a level of service standard of LOS E or better, except where an existing LOS F is already identified. There are two roadways identified in the CMP that would be impacted by project traffic: o I-215 freeway o I-15 freeway Four segments of these two freeways are expected to have an LOS of F during morning peak hours with or without the Project in year 2035, and six segments are expected to have an LOS of F during evening peak hours with or without the Project in year 2035. (EIR Table 5.14-5). All of these segments, except the northbound and southbound segments of I-15 between Sierra Avenue and Glen Helen Parkway, are included in the Caltrans improvement plans for the Devore interchange. (EIR at 5.14-43). With improvements, four of these freeway segments would operate at acceptable levels. However, the following freeway segments would continue to operate at an unacceptable LOS for year 2035 with improvements: o The I-215 freeway segment between Palm Avenue and Devore Road (northbound and southbound); o The I-215 freeway segment between Devore Road and I-15 (northbound) • The I-15 freeway segment between Glen Helen Parkway and Sierra Avenue (northbound and southbound); and o The I-15 freeway segment between I-215 and Glen Helen Parkway (northbound) (EIR Table 5.14-8). Spring Trails would generate traffic that would contribute to the unacceptable levels of service on these freeway segments. Additionally, mainline improvements to the I-15 and I-215 in the Project area are not included in a fee program at this time. (EIR at 5.14-44). As a result, these impacts are significant and unavoidable, and cannot be mitigated. 149 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 921 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations b.Cumulative Impacts. Significant Unavoidable Impact: The EIR concluded that the Project will result in cumulatively significant traffic impacts. Finding:Impacts related to Traffic are discussed in detail in Section 5.14 of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Project will result in cumulatively significant traffic impacts. No funding program is currently available for the proposed Caltrans/SANBAG I-215 and I-15 freeway mainline improvements which would mitigate this impact, which will remain significant and unavoidable. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project would result in both Project-specific and cumulative potentially significant traffic impacts. (EIR at 5.14-44). The local roadways would experience growth in average daily trips as a result of not only this Project, but other growth in the area. Recommended intersection and freeway segment improvements would improve cumulative traffic conditions based upon the East Valley Traffic Model and Project-specific projections. (Id.). However, since some of these improvements are not funded at this time, cumulative impacts would be significant and unavoidable. 4.Greenhouse Gas Emissions. a. Generation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Significant Unavoidable Impact: The EIR concluded that the Project will generate greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. Finding:Impacts related to GHG emissions are discussed in detail in Section 5.16 of the Draft EIR. Mitigation measures applied during both construction and operations of the Project would reduce GHG emissions to the extent feasible. However, based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that Project-related GHG emissions would significantly cumulatively contribute to global climate change in California, and that this impact cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of mitigation measures. Accordingly, the potential for the Project to generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment remains significant and unavoidable. The following mitigation measures will mitigate impacts from GHG emissions to the extent feasible: 150 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 922 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Construction 16-1 Applicants for new developments in Spring Trails shall submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director that the project uses recycled materials for at least 5 percent of construction materials. Recycled materials may include salvaged, reused, and recycled content materials. Recycled and/or salvaged building materials shall be shown on building plans submitted to the City. 16-2 16-3 Applicants for new developments in Spring Trails shall submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director that the project uses 20 percent locally manufactured and produced building materials, which are defined as materials manufactured or produced within 500 miles of the project. Prior to the issuance of building permits, applicants for Spring Trails shall prepare a construction waste management plan to reduce construction debris and material by diverting at least 50 percent of the total of all project-related nonhazardous construction and debris from landfills to recycling or reuse operations (based on the C&D requirements of Section 6-3.602 of the City of Ontario Municipal Code). The construction waste management plan shall identify the amount of construction debris by type that would be generated and the maximum weight of each material type that can feasibly be diverted from landfills. 16-4 16-5 Applicants for new developments in Spring Trails shall submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director that the project uses insulation with at least 75 percent recycled content, such as cellulose, newspaper, or recycled cotton. Applicants for new development proposals in Spring Trails shall require the construction contractor to provide carpooling for workers to and from the work site on days that construction activities require 200 or more workers. These requirements shall be demonstrated to the Development Services Director prior to the issuance of grading permits and shall be noted on the grading plan cover sheet and discussed at all pregrade meetings. Operation Energy Efficiency 16-6 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, residential development plans shall be required to demonstrate that the overall project exceeds 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24) for energy efficiency by 15 percent. Design strategies to meet this standard may include maximizing solar orientation for daylighting and passive heating/cooling, installing appropriate shading devices and landscaping, and utilizing natural ventilation. Other techniques include installing insulation (high R value) and radiant heat barriers, compact fluorescent and/or light emitting diode bulbs, low-e window glazing or double-paned windows, energy-efficient appliances (e.g., Energy Star appliances), cool roofs, and cool pavement. 151 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 923 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 16-7 Applicants shall provide all homeowners with information regarding energy- efficiency rebate programs offered by utility providers and government agencies. Water Conservation and Efficiency 16-8 Applicants for new developments in Spring Trails shall submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director that all toilets, urinals, sinks, showers, and other water fixtures installed onsite shall be ultra-low-flow water fixtures that exceed the Uniform Plumbing Code. Examples are: 1.28 average gallons per flush high efficiency toilets, 2 gallon per minute (gpm) efficient bathroom faucets, 2.2 gpm efficient kitchen faucets, and 2.2 gpm efficient shower heads. 16-9 Mulch planting beds and apply compost and environmentally friendly fertilizers to promote healthy topsoil, maximize plant growth, and reduce plant replacement in the Spring Trails community parks and landscaping. This also reduces the need for longer or more frequent irrigation run times. Forest Resources 3-12 Significant tree resources that are removed from the site during project development shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio or at the exchange ratios specified below. Significant tree resources are defined as any native or nonnative ornamental tree—excluding species of the Eucalyptus genus—that is healthy, structurally sound, and over 20 feet in height. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a certified arborist shall conduct an inventory of all significant trees within the development footprint. This inventory shall be used to determine the number and types of significant trees that will be impacted and the subsequent replacement quantities. The number of replacement trees shall be, at a minimum, 220 trees. Should the aforementioned inventory determine that a greater number of significant trees will be impacted, then that quantity shall be used in determining replacement quantities. The following exchange ratios shall be used: 1) one 36-inch box tree is equivalent to one replacement tree; 2) five 15-gallon trees are equivalent to one replacement tree; 3) ten 5-gallon trees are equivalent to one replacement tree; and 4) fifteen one-gallon trees are equivalent to one replacement tree. During the development of the project, the project applicant shall incorporate the recommendations as set forth in the project arborist report (Integrated Urban Forestry 1998). A certified arborist shall be retained at the developer’s expense to oversee the implementation of these requirements and to specify other requirements as deemed appropriate. The measures to be followed include, but are not limited to, specified protocols for the following: 1) the removal of nonnative trees from the site; 2) the removal and transplantation, when feasible, of structurally sound and healthy native trees to other areas of the project site; 3) the installation of tree protection barriers on all trees to be preserved that are within the reach of vehicles and equipment; 4) tree protection training of construction personnel by a certified arborist; 5) irrigation of trees where the natural water supply is interrupted or diminished or where protected trees may require additional water to endure 152 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 924 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations construction-induced stresses; 6) subsequent replacement of any trees that are damaged or have not survived transplantation and relocation; and 7) implementation of the tree replacement plan, as outlined in the first paragraph of this measure. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director. Facts in Support of the Finding: The proposed Project is not a regionally significant project pursuant to SCAG’s Intergovernmental Review criteria and the CEQA Guidelines. The development contemplated by the Spring Trails Specific Plan would contribute to global climate change through direct emissions of GHG from onsite area sources, offsite energy production required for onsite activities and water use, and vehicle trips generated by the Project. (EIR at 5.16-10). Construction activities would consume fuel and result in the generation of GHG emissions. Construction of the Project is anticipated to commence year 2012, until the anticipated completion year 2015. Construction-related GHG emissions would cease upon completion of the construction phase of individual development projects. Emissions from construction activities were calculated on an annual basis based on the construction phasing and equipment list provided by the applicant. (EIR Table 3-4). Construction emissions associated with the Project are amortized based on a 30-year project lifetime and included in the Project’s GHG emissions inventory. (EIR Table 5.16-3). Fossil fuels used by construction equipment would generate GHG emissions. To reduce these, California has adopted a low carbon fuel standard. The low carbon fuel standard would reduce the carbon content of fuel of both gasoline and diesel fuel, thereby reducing GHG emissions from fuel from construction equipment by 10 percent. (EIR at 5.16-11). The standard went into effect in year 2010 and requires transportation fuel sold in California to have a 10 percent reduction in average carbon intensity by year 2020. The compliance path of the 10 percent reduction target would be incremental and would be “back-loaded”—that is, more reductions would be required in the last five years than the first five years. (Id.). Construction activities would commence after 2010 and would therefore incrementally benefit from this statewide GHG reduction requirement. However, due to the scale of the development activities associated with the Project, emissions would be potentially cumulatively significant without implementation of mitigation measures to reduce carbon emissions. (Id.). 153 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 925 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Approximately 220 native trees within the boundaries of the Project site meet the definition of forest resource. The loss of these forest resources would remove carbon sinks as the forest land is converted to new development associated with the Spring Trails Specific Plan. (Id.). Trees and other vegetation remove CO2 emissions through the photosynthesis process by uptake of CO2 and emission of oxygen. The current inventory (2002–2004) in California shows forests as a carbon sink of 4.7 MM Tons of CO2e. However, carbon sequestration has declined since 1990 and BAU for 2020 assumes no net emissions from forest resources. (Id.). Loss of forest resources to development increases GHG emissions levels as less carbon is sequestered (i.e., stored as plant material). Additionally, wildfires also contribute to GHG emissions. Removal of the 220 native trees would result in a loss of forest resources and therefore a loss of potential carbon sequestration. These trees are required to be replaced in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code Section 19.28.090. Mitigation Measure 5.3-11 requires that these trees are replaced at a 1:1 ratio (or at the exchange ratios specified in the mitigation measure). Because the trees would be replaced, the carbon sequestration loss from these forest resources is considered nominal and no significant impact would occur; this sector is not included in the GHG emissions inventory. (EIR at 5.6-12). For the operations phase, the Project’s GHG emissions are separated into emission sources for the applicable GHG emissions Sectors established by CARB. (Id.). Transportation Sector emissions are produced from vehicular travel to and from the Project site. Electricity Sector sources are indirect GHG emissions from the energy (purchased energy and energy from water use) that is produced offsite. Recycling and Waste Sector includes emissions associated with waste disposal generated by the Project. (Id.). Area sources (Commercial and Residential Sector emissions sources) are owned or controlled by the project (e.g., natural gas combustion, boilers, and furnaces) and produced onsite. The emissions estimates for the Project do not take into account the GHG emission reductions associated with changes to the Building and Energy Efficiency standards, California Appliance Energy Efficiency regulations, California Renewable Energy Portfolio standard, California low carbon-content fuel legislation, changes in the Corporate Average Fuel 154 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 926 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Economy (CAFE) standards (Pavley), and other early action measures in the Scoping Plan to reduce GHG emissions. (EIR Table 5.16-4). Hence, the emissions inventory represents the project’s BAU emission scenario. The largest source of emissions is from the Transportation Sector. While development patterns can influence travel behavior and travel modes, these emissions are indirect sources of GHG, not directly controlled by applicants for new development in the proposed Spring Trails Specific Plan. (EIR at 5.6-12). Project-related Electricity Sector emissions (water and purchased energy) represent the second largest proportion of emissions associated with the project due to the anticipated average square footage of the single-family dwellings units that would be developed on each lot. Average lot size would be approximately 27,337 square feet (0.6 acre), with the largest lot at 13.9 acres and the smallest lot at 10,800 square feet (0.2 acre). (Id.). These two sectors are followed by area sources associated with the Commercial and Residential Sector and Recycling and Waste. These direct sources of emissions can be controlled by new development by ensuring that structures are built efficiently to reduce demand on energy use, that nonpotable/recycled water is used where available to reduce demand of potable water use, and that recycling is available onsite to decrease the amount of waste sent to landfills. (Id.). The Project would generate a net increase of approximately 9,748 MTons of GHG per year or 9.4 MTons per service population based on a net increase of 1,035 people. (EIR Table 5.16-4). There is currently no threshold adopted by SCAQMD for development projects that defines at which point GHG emissions generated by a project becomes significant. However, SCAQMD’s Working Group for a GHG Significance Threshold has proposed a threshold of 3,000 MTons. Consequently, the total increase in GHG emissions onsite from the Project is considered to be substantial in the absence of mitigation. In order to determine whether GHG emissions associated with the Project are significant, a consistency analysis with transportation and nontransportation GHG reduction strategies was conducted. (EIR at 5.16-13). Almost half of the increase in GHG emissions due to the Project is from transportation sources. The Project is inconsistent with several transportation strategies aimed at 155 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 927 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by incorporating mixed-use or locating within ½ mile of services and transit. (EIR Table 5.16-5). Therefore, the Project’s transportation sources are considered to substantially contribute to GHG emissions in California. The Project’s non-transportation sector GHG emissions would potentially significantly contribute to the State’s GHG emissions inventory. (EIR Table 5.16-4). Even with implementation of mitigation, this impact will remain significant and unavoidable. D.Additional Topics Required by CEQA. 1. Significant Irreversible Environmental Effects. CEQA mandates that any significant irreversible environmental changes that would be involved in the Project be addressed as part of the EIR process. (CEQA Guidelines 15126(c)). An impact would fall into this category if: the project would involve a large commitment of nonrenewable resources; the primary and secondary impacts of the project would generally commit future generations to similar uses; the project involves uses in which irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental incidents associated with the project; or the proposed consumption of resources is not justified. In the case of the proposed Project, implementation would involve a long-term irreversible change to the existing environmental conditions, resulting in the following significant irreversible environmental effects:  Implementation of the Project would include construction activities that would entail the commitment of nonrenewable and/or slowly renewable energy resources, human resources, and natural resources such as lumber and other forest products, sand and gravel, asphalt, steel, copper, lead, other metals, and water.  An increased commitment of social services and public maintenance services (e.g., police, fire, schools, libraries, and sewer and water services) would also be required. The energy and social service commitments would be long-term obligations in view of the low likelihood of returning the land to its original condition once it has been developed.  An increase in Project-related vehicle trips would accompany Project-related population growth. Over the long term, emissions associated with such vehicle trips would continue to contribute to the South Coast Air Basin’s nonattainment designation for ozone (O3) and particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10).  Project-generated vehicle trips would increase emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) to levels that are above the California Air Resource Board thresholds for both buildout year 2013 and future year 2030. Vehicle-related GHG emissions would cause significant and unavoidable impacts. 156 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 928 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The Commission concurs with the preceding findings regarding Significant Irreversible Environmental Effects. 2.Growth Inducing Impacts. CEQA requires a discussion of ways in which a project could be growth-inducing. The CEQA Guidelines, specifically Section 15126.2(d), identify a project as growth-inducing if it fosters economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing either directly (such as by proposing new homes and businesses, or indirectly (such as through extension of roads or other infrastructure) in the surrounding environment. Impacts related to growth inducement would also be realized if a project provides infrastructure or service capacity which accommodates growth beyond the levels currently permitted by local or regional plans and policies. In general, growth induced by a project is considered a significant impact if it directly or indirectly affects the ability of agencies to provide needed public services, or if it can be demonstrated that the potential growth significantly affects the environment in some other way. The Spring Trails Project would be built in an area that presently does not have any public infrastructure such as water and wastewater pipelines; onsite roads; or electrical, natural gas, or telecommunication utilities. The 304-unit residential development plan (now reduced to 215 units) would require the expansion of these public infrastructure services. The surrounding community of Devore has limited infrastructure to support the expansion of these services. For example, the water and wastewater infrastructure must be expanded in the community of Devore before it can be expanded to the Spring Trails site. Roadway improvements, electrical service, natural gas service, and telecommunication systems must be expanded in the area connecting the project to existing development as well. The expansion of onsite infrastructure for Spring Trails would not itself induce growth in the area, since it would be used solely by residences in Spring Trails, but the expansion of infrastructure in the community of Devore may cause indirect growth, such as on the 26.4-acre County area adjacent to the Project site. Additional development in Devore could be supported by the expansion of infrastructure in this area, allowing for development that would not otherwise be supported. The expansion of infrastructure in Devore is being completed to serve the Spring Trails development and other development in the area, so the Project is not the sole reason for the expansion. However, the approval of the Spring Trails development would guarantee the completion of all required infrastructure improvements in the surrounding area and on the Project site, since these expansions are necessary for project operation. The public services that would serve the Spring Trails Project, including police, fire protection, school, and library services, would require varying degrees of expansion. The San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (County Fire) would service the site during a fire emergency. The nearest fire station (232) would increase its staffing levels from three to four to service the site. Any expansion of police services would be financed through the law enforcement developer fees charged to the Project applicant. According to the San Bernardino Police Department, the Spring Trails Project would cause a slight increase in police service calls. 157 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 929 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The Project is anticipated to generate 101 elementary school students, 52 middle school students and 59 high school students, based upon the estimated population growth resulting from the additional residential units. (FEIR at pg. 3-22). The Project will be required to pay school impact fees to the San Bernardino City Unified School District pursuant to Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995 to offset the additional students entering the District. Payment of fees to a school district, under Senate Bill 50, is considered full mitigation for a project’s impacts on public schools. (DEIR at 5.12-12). Furthermore, the nearest high school (Cajon High School) and the nearest middle school to the Project (Cesar Chavez Middle School) have more than sufficient additional capacity for any new students generated by the Project. It should be noted that the nearest high school (North Verdemont Elementary School) has capacity for an additional 82 students. (DEIR at 5.12-11). The Project will also be required to pay additional fees for library services. The Project will add an estimated 711 persons upon full build-out. (FEIR at3-23). A library system is considered adequate if the system can provide two volumes per persons. Because the library system is well established, with the additional population anticipated from the Project, the library would only be required to add an additional 26 items to remain adequate. The City’s Library Facilities Fee of $596.63 per residential unit is sufficient to supply the additional items and maintain a less than significant impact on libraries (DEIR at 5.12-13). The fees that are required to be paid as part of the Project are sufficient to meet Project demands and any additional impacts that are placed on services, including the services of fire, police, library, and school facilities. The fees would be applied to all existing and future development in the area and thus benefit not just the Project, but the overall community through expanded and increased services. The increase in services for the area may encourage other development in the area and act as an inducement to future growth. Spring Trails includes residential development that would provide housing for employees of the San Bernardino area. The City of San Bernardino is considered to be jobs-rich, with a projected jobs-to-housing balance of 2.00 in 2035 (without project). Jobs in the City of San Bernardino are expected to grow from 81,115 jobs in 2000 to 157,088 jobs in 2035. With the proposed Project, the jobs-to-housing balance would be 1.99 in 2035. This would create a more balanced jobs-to-housing ratio. The Project would not create a need for additional housing, nor would it create a demand for jobs. The approval of Spring Trails would require the approval of discretionary actions that may set precedents for future projects with similar characteristics. Spring Trails would require approval of: A General Plan Amendment (GPA–02-09) to approve the annexation of the site and change the site’s land use designation; a Development Code Amendment (DCA 12-10) to recognize the Spring Trails Specific Plan as a Special Purpose District; a Specific Plan (SP 10- 01); a Tentative Tract Map (TTM 15576); and a Development Agreement with the City. The approval of these actions changes the existing restrictions on growth set by the general plan and zoning laws, which may encourage growth of a similar manner in the areas surrounding Spring Trails or other undeveloped areas near or in the City of San Bernardino. 158 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 930 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations If additional development were allowed in the vicinity of the project, it would cause additional environmental impacts. However, future projects would need to complete environmental review, and discretionary approval would need to be given to projects following review by the Common Council. Spring Trails would not change the existing protocol for project approval, and would not provide precedents or make it more likely for other projects to gain approval of similar applications. Based on the foregoing, the Project should not result in unforeseen nor unmitigable growth-inducing impacts. The Commission concurs with the preceding findings regarding Growth Inducing Impacts. E.Project Alternatives. Section 21100 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15126 of the State CEQA Guidelines require an EIR to identify and discuss a No Project/No Development Alternative as well as a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed Project that would feasibly attain most of the basic Project objectives, and would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant environmental impacts. “CEQA recognizes that in determining whether and how a project should be approved, a public agency has an obligation to balance a variety of public objectives, including economic, environmental, and social factors and in particular the goal of providing a decent home and satisfying living environment for every Californian” (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15021(d)). The EIR analyzed the following four (4) alternatives to the Project as proposed, and evaluated these alternatives for their ability to meet the Project’s objectives as described in Section II.D above. The No Project alternative is presented consistent with the requirements of the CEQA Guidelines §15126.6. The remaining alternatives were selected based on their ability to fulfill the basic Project Objectives and their capability for reducing significant impacts of the proposal. Alternatives selected for evaluation are described below. 1.No Project/No Development Alternative. For the purposes of the DEIR Alternatives Analysis, the No Project Alternative is considered to be equivalent to a “No Build” scenario. That is, if the Project or some similar development proposal is not implemented on the subject site, there are no other known or probable scenarios for the subject property, in which case the site would likely remain in its current state for the foreseeable future, and no discretionary approvals would be required. The No Project/No Development Alternative would preserve the existing physical conditions of the Project site. It assumes there would be no development of any type nor would development occur under existing land use designation parameters. This alternative would preserve the site for open space and would preclude the development of the site under the City or County General Plan land use designations. The low-density residential development and Spring Trails Specific Plan would not be implemented, and supporting infrastructure (i.e., roads and 159 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 931 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations utility infrastructure) would not be built. With this alternative, the site would remain open for future land use proposals. The No Project/No Development Alternative would avoid impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geological resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards (wind, hazardous materials), hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, public services, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. Compared to the proposed Project, impacts would be similar for mineral resources. It would not reduce impacts to hazards directly related to fire since the site would remain undeveloped. The groves of eucalyptus trees represent a high fire hazard for the site. This project would not extend water improvements to the project site that would benefit firefighting for the site and also benefit surrounding residences. Overall, this alternative would reduce environmental impacts relative to the proposed Project and would reduce the following significant impacts of the proposed Project to less than significant:  Air Quality (construction-related pollutant emissions)  Greenhouse Gas Emissions (traffic-related greenhouse gas emissions)  Noise (construction-related noise near sensitive receptors)  Transportation and Traffic (project’s contribution to CMP freeway segment unacceptable level of service) The No Project/No Development Alternative would not achieve the Project Objective of developing the Site as envisioned by the City’s 2005 General Plan (Objective 1). The site is designated for residential development and is included in the City’s General Plan Housing Element. The City has a limited base of available high-quality, low density residential development based upon a review of the MLS listings for the City as well as under General Plan designation areas for low density residential development. Such high-quality, low density housing is desirable to attract and retain top quality candidates for positions at the University and other institutions. According to the City of San Bernardino Housing Element Adopted June 20, 2011, approximately one-third of the City’s housing stock is between 30 and 49 years old, with an additional 35.3 percent over 50 years old. (Pages 3-25 and 3-26). Only 2,720 housing units were constructed between the years of 2000-2005, during the height of the housing boom. (Housing Element Adopted June 20, 2011, Table H-12). The household composition of the City shows that 82% of the City’s households are moderate to very-low income, while only 18% are above moderate income. (Id. Chart 4, pg. 3-17). There are few other proposed single-family residential developments within the City at this time and thus the proposed Project will fill a residential need within the City as is envisioned within the City’s General Plan. Such a need is identified generally in Housing Element policy 3.1.1, which states: “Provide adequate sites to accommodate the production of a variety of housing types through land use designation, zoning, specific plans, and overlay districts.” The Verdemont Heights Area Plan, found on page 2-75 of the General Plan Land Use Element and in which this Project site is located, further discusses strategy to meet the Housing Element policy 3.1.1, identifying in strategy 4 on page 2-83 to “Promote the development of higher end housing.” Nor would the alternative provide any of the amenities of the proposed Project, and thus would not be able to meet Objectives 2, 3, 4 and 5. Housing Element policy 3.1.1 further 160 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 932 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations encourages the development of a variety of housing, including high-quality, low-density housing, stating: “Provide adequate sites to accommodate the production of a variety of housing types through land use designation, zoning, specific plans, and overlay districts.” City does not have a large variety of high-quality, low-density housing and the proposed project would provide additional variety as anticipated in the Housing Element Policy 3.1.1. The Verdemont Heights Area Plan, found on page 2-75 of the General Plan Land Use Element and in which this Project site is located, further discusses strategy to meet the Housing Element policy 3.1.1, identifying in strategy 4 on page 2-83 to “Promote the development of higher end housing.” In addition, the site in its current state does not provide access for community recreational uses and does not provide access to hiking or equestrian trails, despite its proximity to the San Bernardino National Forest. The Proposed Project provides additional recreational opportunities for the community, such as public and private parks, equestrian trails, and hiking trails. Project Objectives 2, 4, 5, 6, and 8 would be met under the No Project/No Development Alternative. Although the No Project/No Development Alternative would not include the construction of roadways, it would not interfere with the existing roadway system in the area and would essentially meet Objective 2 because it would not interfere with the surrounding community. The No Project/No Development Alternative would be consistent with land use policies of the surrounding San Bernardino National Forest (Objective 5). Since the Project site would be undeveloped, it would not be required to meet land use development policies of the SBNF, and it would be consistent with SBNF land use plans. Since the No Project/No Development Alternative precludes development of the site, it would not create a development footprint and would maintain open space, allowing it to meet Objective 6. Objective 7 would also be met, because the No Project/No Development Alternative would avoid all significant environmental impacts of construction and long-term improvements of the proposed Project. Finding:Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the No Project/No Development Alternative would not fully meet the basic Project Objectives. Accordingly, the Commission concurs with the City rejection of the No Project/No Development Alternative. 2.No Project/Existing County General Plan Alternative. Under the No Project/Existing County General Plan Alternative, the Project site would not be annexed to the City of San Bernardino, and it would be developed in accordance with the land use designations and related overlay constraints included in the County of San Bernardino General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The general plan (2007) designates the southern portion of the project site (approximately 190.6 acres) as Residential Estate (RL-5), with a minimum lot size of five acres, and the northern portion (approximately 160 acres) as private unincorporated land in the San Bernardino National Forest. Site grading and home construction would be limited to the RL-5 portion of the site (the approximately 190.6-acre southern half). With a minimum lot size of five acres, a maximum of 38 homes could be developed, resulting in a gross density of 0.20 units/acres for the 190.6 acres. 161 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 933 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Earthwork would be substantially reduced for this alternative. Only a portion of each five-acre lot for each residential unit developed under the County General Plan would be graded. The size of the graded area would depend on the individual house size and amount of driveway/access road needed to serve the house. This alternative assumes that primary access would be provided from the existing Meyers Road, and secondary or emergency access could be provided by Martin Ranch Road. The development of new roads would not be required to provide access to the 38 homes. Development would most likely be concentrated within the area of fewest constraints, primarily the area characterized with slopes less than 15 percent. The No Project/Existing County General Plan Alternative would comply with County development restrictions, including zoning overlay areas for Fire Safety, Geological Hazards, and Open Space. According to the San Bernardino County Hazards Overlay Map, the southern portion of the project site is within Fire Safety Area 3 (FS3), which covers areas generally south of FS1 (the northern portion of the site, which is within the San Bernardino National Forest) and areas within the wildland-urban interface. As outlined in Section 82.13.030, “Fire Safety Areas,” of the San Bernardino County Municipal Code, FS1 includes areas in the mountains and valley foothills. It includes all the land generally within the San Bernardino National Forest boundary and is characterized by areas with moderate and steep terrain and moderate to heavy fuel loading, contributing to high fire hazard conditions. FS3 includes lands just to the south of the mountain FS1 area. These lands are primarily within the wildland-urban interface of the Valley Region and consist of varying terrain, from relatively flat to steeply sloping hillside areas. Development in FS3 is prone to wildfire primarily because of its proximity to FS1 zones. FS3 areas are also subject to Santa Ana wind conditions that have the potential to dramatically spread wildland fires. The Geological Hazards Overlay Zone map also shows the site in landslide and earthquake fault zones. The No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative would reduce impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geological resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems (solid waste and wastewater). Compared to the proposed Project, impacts would be similar, although slightly reduced, for land use and planning, mineral resources, and population and housing. Utility and service impacts directly related to population- based demand factors (water supply, solid waste generation, and wastewater generation) would be substantially reduced for this alternative in comparison to the proposed Project. The infrastructure to serve the project site under the No Project/Existing County General Plan Alternative would not be guaranteed, however, as the City would not have jurisdiction over the site. The 38 units under this alternative, however, would be unlikely able to amortize the major infrastructure upgrades—particularly for domestic water delivery and storage—that would be required to adequately provide water and fire flow requirements to the Project. (DEIR 7.5.18, page 7-17). Similarly, it would not provide the benefit to other area residents associated with these improvements under the proposed Project. Overall, this alternative would reduce environmental 162 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 934 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations impacts relative to the proposed Project and would reduce the following significant impacts of the proposed Project to less than significant:  Air Quality (construction-related pollutant emissions)  Greenhouse Gas Emissions (traffic-related greenhouse gas emissions)  Transportation and Traffic (project’s contribution to CMP freeway segment unacceptable level of service) The No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative, the City could not ensure that the Project would achieve Objective 1 as it would have no control or oversight over the development of the lots. The Project site is located within the City’s sphere of influence and is designated in the City’s 2005 General Plan as Residential Estates that entail lots of 1 acre per residence. If the site is constructed under the County General Plan, it would not be annexed to the City and would be consistent with the County land use designation consisting of 5-acre residential lots. A Specific Plan would not be required for the build-out of the 38 lots and therefore the design criteria and guidelines included in the Specific Plan setting forth strict guidelines to ensure “high quality design” (Specific Plan, page 4-1) would not be implemented as part of the Project. Nor would the landscaping, sidewalk and other criteria that are implemented as part of the Specific Plan to “integrate areas of development with open space areas in a manner that provides a natural transition between the two elements” (Id.) be required under the County Code. The Proposed Project includes 304 lots (now reduced to 215 lots) that will average one acre per lot throughout the development by clustering the lots and ensuring substantial open space is preserved. The extent to which the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative could achieve Objectives Nos. 2, 3 and 4 would be largely dependent on the potential financial return on 38 homes and the ability to fund amenities (including hiking, equestrian, and bicycles trails) and required infrastructure to assure a high-quality development. The additional requirements for parks found within the City’s Code would not be required, and hiking, equestrian and bicycle trails would not be required under the County’s General Plan and thus may not be considered as part of the overall development. The cost to construct Project access roadways, site grading, and infrastructure and building construction would be partially financed through or balanced by the property sales on the Project site. It is uncertain whether Objective 8 could be achieved and a reasonable return on investment achieved. Since the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative would have fewer residential units, the total construction and operation costs may not be offset by the property sales, and this Project Objective would not be met. The inclusion of fewer amenities would offset some of the cost for roadways, water, sewer, fire control and other required improvements for the Project, but would lessen the benefit of the Project to the surrounding community. Furthermore, the City would not benefit from the development through the collection of Development Impact Fees, Library Fees, and infrastructure improvements that would be paid under the proposed Project. Instead, the County would be the recipient of any such fees and the beneficiary of any property tax increases resulting from the improvements. It is also unlikely that Objective 2 could be achieved under the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative, because the description and analysis above assumed that this alternative would be served by existing Project-area access roads. Access via Meyers Road is opposed by the surrounding 163 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 935 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations community, and would be perceived as not preserving the integrity of the Verdemont community. Project objective Nos. 4 through 7 could be achieved under the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative. Development would be avoided in the San Bernardino National Forest and increase the buffer between forest-owned land and developed areas relative to the proposed Project. It would maximize open space and would be designed to respect natural conditions, including wildland fires, flooding, and seismic hazards (Objectives 5 and 6). Construction- related measures to mitigate noise and air quality impacts as well as long-term operational mitigation measures of the proposed Project could be assumed to also apply to this alternative, thereby achieving Project Objective No. 7. Finding:Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative would not fully meet the basic Project Objectives. The Commission concurs with the City and therefore rejects the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative. 3.Alternative Site Plan. A conceptual Alternative Site Plan was developed to evaluate the potential to modify the proposed Project to minimize or eliminate the significant impacts of the project (construction- related air quality and noise impacts). Since this alternative also reduces the number of housing units, it was also intended to reduce long-term operational, significant unavoidable greenhouse gas emission (GHG) impacts. The approach taken to reduce these impacts was to prepare a concept that would reduce the size of the area graded and the corresponding volume of earthwork. Based on the opportunity to reduce the development footprint, another objective of this alternative was to minimize other environmental impacts to the extent possible. This conceptual site design would have a total onsite development footprint of 137.6 acres (123.8 graded acres and 13.8 acres of fuel modification area), a reduction of 43 percent from the proposed Project’s onsite development area of 241.5 acres. Assuming the same development density as the proposed Project (1.27 du/ac), this alternative would yield 175 single-family homes. This results in a slightly greater percentage of a 46% overall reduction in the number of houses. Onsite circulation would remain essentially the same, with the exception of some road adjustments on the western portion of the site and the removal of one of two roads that connect the northern quarter of the site with the reservoir tank. Project access would remain the same as with the proposed project. The primary access road would enter the site on the southeast as an extension of Verdemont Drive, and the secondary access road would enter the site from the southwest and connect to the frontage road along I-215. The Alternative Site Plan would reduce, but not eliminate the short-term air quality and noise impacts. It would have similar greenhouse gas emission impacts as the proposed Project, and would be inconsistent with the transportation strategies of reducing VMT. Cultural Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, and 164 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 936 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Population and Housing impacts would also be similar. All other impacts (aesthetics, biological resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, utilities and service systems, and forest resources) would be lessened in comparison to the proposed Project. The Alternative Site Plan has the potential to attain most of the proposed Project’s objectives, but would not fully realize the anticipated development of infrastructure and high- quality housing needs of the City. The 43% reduction in the number of units and reduction in overall project scope would impact the ability to achieve Project objectives 2, 3 and 8 as the overall construction of infrastructure and payment of fees would also be reduced by the same approximate percentage. The current project design includes an approximate 30% reduction of units due to further evaluation of fault hazards on the site. From the economic standpoint of the City, the proposed Project, as opposed to the alternative, will pay substantial fees that will benefit the City, including Development Impact Fees, School Fees, Library Fees permitting fees, public services fees, and related development fees that provide additional benefit both to the community by increasing the funding and services available, but also to the City. For example, the Project will be required to pay additional fees to support police services in the amount of $183,506.18 and to pay library fees in the amount of $181,375.52, The Project provides additional property taxes that will also contribute to public services. These fees are outlined in the findings and further identified in the EIR. The Project will also provide the opportunity for construction jobs in the community for a substantial period of time, depending on how quickly the proposed Project is built out. The 43% reduction in units also makes it infeasible from the developer’s standpoint to create an attractive, viable project and realize a reasonable return on investment as stated in Objective 8. The developer has indicated that the 30% reduction in the number of units can result in a sustainable project over the long-term. Although the overall fees that will be paid to the City will be reduced, the Project still requires substantial infrastructure costs in terms of utilities, fire suppression, and roadways, in addition to the amenities included in the overall Specific Plan. Under this Alternative, the cost per residence increases substantially with the reduction in the overall number of units, resulting in a 37% increase in cost per unit to construct while the potential sale price for each unit would remain steady. With fewer units, the cost to provide and construct infrastructure in addition to the proposed residential units would not be balanced by project revenues. The Project as proposed includes major infrastructure improvements, including the construction of two offsite access roads, extension of domestic water service and three water reservoirs, and extension of sewer service to the site. These infrastructure improvements are necessary in order to implement and adequately manage the wildfire managements plan and buffer areas, as well as to service the proposed residential units under both this Alternative as well as the proposed Project. Both the proposed Project and the Alternative Site Plan would also include and require costly mitigation programs, including a comprehensive tree replacement program. These costs are not reduced proportionately with the reduction of the number of units as the infrastructure is still necessary for the remaining development. The financial viability of this alternative is infeasible considering these costs. 165 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 937 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding:Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Alternative Site Plan Alternative would not fully meet the basic Project Objectives. The Commission concurs with the City and therefore rejects the Alternative Site Plan Alternative. 4.Reduced Daily Grading Alternative. The Reduced Daily Grading Alternative was defined and evaluated for its potential to reduce air quality impacts. The air quality impacts of the proposed project pertain to the emission of NOX from construction activities at a local and regional level. The primary source of NOX emissions is vehicle emissions, particularly heavy construction equipment. The Reduced Daily Grading Alternative assumes that both the number of acres graded per day and the number of construction vehicles onsite per day would be reduced by 75 percent. This would make the grading phase approximately four times as long as would be under the proposed Project. The Reduced Daily Grading Alternative would grade the project site over a period of 12 months rather than 3 months. The 12-month schedule would likely be extended even more due to rainy season interruptions. All of the listed equipment would be reduced from eight to two, with the exception of the water trucks. Site development after grading would be the same as the proposed Project, and other project characteristics would be the same. The total number of units built would be 304 (now reduced to 215 units), and site access and circulation would be the same as under the proposed Project. The Reduced Daily Grading Alternative would substantially reduce construction-related air quality impacts. Daily NOX emissions would be reduced from 740 to 181 pounds per day, but would still exceed the significance threshold of 100 pounds per day. Impacts to noise and traffic during construction would be worsened by the Reduced Daily Grading Alternative because of the extended construction period. Hydrology and water quality impacts would also be worse, because sediment runoff would increase during the longer construction period. Other construction-related impacts would be similar to the proposed Project, and long-term operational impacts would be the same as for the proposed Project. The Reduced Daily Grading Alternative would implement the same proposed site plan and Specific Plan as the proposed Project, and would attain most the proposed Project objectives. Extending the construction grading activities over a year, however, could jeopardize the economic viability of the Project and a reasonable return on investment for both the City and the developer (Objective 8). This Alternative would require a greater dedication of the City’s resources to verify permit requirements for a longer period of time. The payment of development fees would also be extended as such fees would only be required as certain stages of development would be met. Furthermore, the number of jobs for construction workers would decrease. From the developer’s standpoint, the length of time necessary to complete the grading would greatly exceed any cost savings as well as limit the number of jobs created as a result of the project build-out as the grading schedule, equipment mix, and workers included in the proposed Project description are based on typical construction activities. The extended schedule would likely result in costly inefficiencies. Under the mitigation requirements for the Project, 166 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 938 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations timing of grading and construction affects the potential biological impacts resulting from the project, as is identified in the EIR. Where construction schedules must be drawn out, other phases must be delayed and the potential for repeated studies and other requirements increases. This increases costs to both the City and the developer as greater resources from both will be required, makes effective construction phasing and planning difficult, and the extended construction period would also limit the Project’s ability to minimize environmental impacts associated with construction of improvements (Objective 7). Finding:Based on the entire record, the Commission concurs with the City finding that the Reduced Daily Grading Alternative would not fully meet the basic Project Objectives. The Commission concurs with the City and therefore rejects the Reduced Daily Grading Alternative. 5.Environmentally Superior Alternative. Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires the identification of the environmentally superior alternative. The No Project/No Development and the No Project/Existing General Plan alternatives would be the environmentally superior alternatives of the Project alternatives evaluated. The elimination or substantial reduction of units developed and natural area disturbed would reduce environmental impacts. Neither of these alternatives would result in any significant, unavoidable impacts. The State CEQA Guidelines also require the identification of another environmentally superior alternative if the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative. Of the remaining project alternatives, Alternative 3 – Alternative Site Plan Alternative is considered environmentally superior. The Commission concurs with this finding and given the reduction in total units to 215 units, the project that can be developed, if LAFCO 3188A is approved, would be consistent with this finding. The Alternative Site Plan Alternative would eliminate 129 lots and reduce site development by 43%. This would, in turn, reduce each of the significant, unavoidable impacts identified for the project as proposed, including short-term, construction-related air quality and noise impacts and long-term greenhouse gas emission impacts. The overall reduction of the development footprint and anticipated reduction in earthwork quantities would reduce, but not eliminate the significant air quality and noise impacts. Although it would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 43 percent, it would still emit a substantial amount of greenhouse gases and would have similar impacts. The Alternative Site Plan would be able to meet the majority of the project objectives. The Alternative Site Plan would also reduce a number of impacts, but not all, that were identified as potentially significant in this DEIR but have been reduced to less than significant. Specifically, the Alternative Site Plan would reduce aesthetic, biological, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, utilities, and forest resource impacts. However, the Alternative Site Plan Alternative is not financially feasible based upon the additional burden placed upon the Project to develop infrastructure, including water and sewer capacity, to provide protective 167 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 939 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations measures, water towers, buffer zones and infrastructure for wildfire protection, and the implementation of recreational and trail uses. The cost per residence increases substantially with the reduction in the overall number of units, resulting in a 37% increase in cost per unit to construct while the potential sale price for each unit would remain steady. With fewer units, the cost to provide and construct infrastructure in addition to the proposed residential units would not be balanced by project revenues. These features benefit the community as a whole and provide protection from fire, floods and landslides to existing residents. They add substantial cost to the project that the Alternative Site Plan Alternative does not support economically. F.Statement of Overriding Considerations. The San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the significant unavoidable impacts associated with adoption of the Project as addressed in the EIR, specifically: 1) 2) 3) 4) Air Quality; Noise; Traffic and Transportation; and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. This section of the findings specifically addresses the requirement of Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, which requires the lead agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable significant impacts, and to determine whether the impacts are acceptably overridden by the Project benefits. If the Commission finds that the previously stated major project benefits outweigh the unavoidable significant adverse environmental impacts noted above, the Commission may, nonetheless, approve the Project. Each of the separate benefits are hereby determined to be, in itself, and independent of other Project benefits, basis for overriding all unavoidable environmental impacts identified in the EIR and these findings. The City’s findings, concurred in by the Commission, set forth in the preceding sections identified all of the adverse environmental impacts and feasible mitigation measures which can reduce impacts to less than significant levels where feasible, or to the lowest feasible levels where significant impacts remain. The findings have also analyzed three alternatives to determine whether there are reasonable or feasible alternatives to the proposed action, or whether they might reduce or eliminate the significant adverse impacts of the Project. The EIR presents evidence that implementing the development of the Project will cause significant adverse impacts which cannot be substantially mitigated to non-significant levels. These significant impacts have been outlined above, and the Commission makes the following finding: Finding:Having considered the unavoidable adverse impacts of the Project, the Commission hereby determines that all feasible mitigation has been adopted to reduce or avoid the potentially significant impacts identified in the EIR, and that no additional feasible mitigation is available to further reduce significant impacts. Further, the Commission finds that economic, social and other considerations of the Project related to provision of housing outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts described above. The reason for accepting these remaining unmitigated 168 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 940 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations impacts are described below. In making this finding, the Commission has balanced the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable environmental impacts, and has indicated its willingness to accept those effects. The Commission further finds that the Project’s benefits are substantial and override each unavoidable impact of the Project. These benefits include substantial infrastructure that the Project will directly and indirectly, through funding mechanisms, provide. These benefits include the following, which are laid out in greater detail in the findings:  The water supply system for the area will be augmented to provide water to the new residents, but will also provide improved service to those existing residents in the area currently on City water.  Three onsite reservoirs will be constructed to provide better service and fire protection to the area.  Offsite improvements to the water supply system include a series of pump stations and transmission lines within the Verdemont community.  Improved fuel modification zones will provide protection to both the proposed community as well as to the existing structures in the area.  Project would be required to pay development impacts fees for law enforcement, schools, library, fire, traffic and other related fees that will supplement the City’s funds and provide the necessary public services to the Project.  Traffic improvements, including dual left turn lanes at the intersection of Palm Avenue and Kendall Drive. In particular, the Project scope includes substantial infrastructure improvements for water storage and delivery systems that will not only serve the Project itself, but also benefit the larger community. The additional water storage and delivery systems will provide for more effective wildfire controls for existing residents as well as the proposed Project given the additional safety and setback measures that are incorporated into the Project. The water infrastructure will also provide a source potable water for existing residents as well as a water source for firefighting personnel in the event of a wildfire. The Project components related to fire hazards and safety, including construction, buffer zones, and other features will also provide additional benefits to those residents already located in the area as a means of preventing the spread of any wildfires through the area. Storm drainage improvements will also provide additional benefits related to the existing flood and erosion conditions prevalent in the area. The area and existing residents have faced historical issues with flooding, landslides and wildfires which will be substantially improved with the implementation of the proposed Project. Funding mechanisms and impact fees that will be generated as part of the project will assist in roadway improvements and as well general fund contributions through property tax that can assist in funding necessary police, fire and safety services for the area. From an economic standpoint, the project will pay substantial fees that will benefit the City, including Development Impact Fees, School Fees, Library Fees permitting fees, public services fees, and related development fees that provide additional benefit both to the community 169 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 941 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations by increasing the funding and services available, but also to the City. For example, the Project will be required to pay additional fees to support police services in the amount of $183,506.18 and to pay library fees in the amount of $181,375.52, The Project provides additional property taxes that will also contribute to public services. These fees are outlined in the findings and further identified in the EIR. The Project will also provide the opportunity for construction jobs in the community for a substantial period of time, depending on how quickly the proposed Project is built out. The Project provides additional social benefits to the community and City as well. The Project will dedicate more than 245 acres of permanent open space, including natural open space, controlled open space and parks, on site. The parks that are proposed as part of the Project will include shade structures, tot lots, gardens, observation points, and other related features and offer opportunities for the community that are not currently present in the area. The Project also provides an interconnected trail system that would include community trails for bicycle and pedestrian use, equestrian trails, and hiking trails. These proposed trails would substantially increase the recreational opportunities currently available in the City. Furthermore, the City has a limited base of available high-quality, low density residential development based upon a review of the MLS listings for the City as well as under General Plan designation areas for low density residential development. Such high-quality, low density housing is desirable to attract and retain top quality candidates for positions at the University and other institutions. According to the City of San Bernardino Housing Element Adopted June 20, 2011, approximately one-third of the City’s housing stock is between 30 and 49 years old, with an additional 35.3 percent over 50 years old. (Pages 3-25 and 3-26). Only 2,720 housing units were constructed between the years of 2000-2005, during the height of the housing boom. (Housing Element Adopted June 20, 2011, Table H-12). The household composition of the City shows that 82% of the City’s households are moderate to very-low income, while only 18% are above Moderate income. (Id. Chart 4, pg. 3-17). There are few other proposed developments within the City at this time and thus the proposed Project will fill a residential need within the City as is envisioned within the City’s General Plan. Such a need is identified generally in Housing Element policy 3.1.1, which states: “Provide adequate sites to accommodate the production of a variety of housing types through land use designation, zoning, specific plans, and overlay districts.” The Verdemont Heights Area Plan, found on page 2-75 of the General Plan Land Use Element and in which this Project site is located, further discusses strategy to meet the Housing Element policy 3.1.1, identifying in strategy 4 on page 2-83 to “Promote the development of higher end housing.” Additional benefits are as follows: 1.Findings Related to Traffic and Transportation Impacts. a. Increased Traffic. There are two roadways identified in the CMP that would be impacted by Project traffic: I-215 freeway and I-15 freeway. Four segments of these two freeways are expected to have an LOS of F during morning peak hours with or without the project in year 2035, and six segments are expected to have an LOS of F during evening peak hours with or without the Project in year 2035. All of these segments, except the northbound and southbound segments of I-15 between 170 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 942 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Sierra Avenue and Glen Helen Parkway, are included in the Caltrans improvement plans for the Devore interchange. With improvements, two of these freeway segments would operate at acceptable levels. However, six freeway segments would continue to operate at an unacceptable LOS for year 2035:  The I-215 freeway segment between Palm Avenue and Devore Road (northbound and southbound)  The I-215 freeway segment between Devore Road and I-15 (northbound)  The I-15 freeway segment between Glen Helen Parkway and Sierra Avenue (northbound and southbound).  The I-15 freeway segment between I-215 and Glen Helen Parkway (northbound). Spring Trails would generate traffic that would contribute to the unacceptable levels of service on these freeway segments. Additionally, mainline improvements to the I-15 and I-215 in the Project area are not included in a fee program at this time. There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the significant impacts, which will remain significant and unavoidable. However, benefits obtained from the Project are sufficient to justify approval of the Project. These impacts are overridden by the Project benefits described in Section II.D of this document, as well as the local and regional benefits that will be realized under the Development Agreement, described in Section II.B of this document. The Commission concurs with the preceding findings. b.Cumulative Impacts. Development of the Project will contribute incrementally to Traffic and Transportation impacts that are cumulatively considerable, significant, and unavoidable when considered within the context of traffic that will be generated by other known or probable developments, as discussed above. This is a cumulatively considerable impact that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. However, benefits obtained from the Project are sufficient to justify approval of the Project, and these impacts are overridden by Project benefits described in Sections II.B and II.D of this document. The Commission concurs with the preceding finding. 2.Findings Related to Air Quality Impacts. a. Construction Emissions. The Project is not consistent with the applicable air quality management plan because construction-related air pollutant emissions would exceed the SCAQMD’s regional and localized emission thresholds. Mitigation measures used to control construction and operational emissions would reduce Project and cumulative level impacts, but they would remain significant and unavoidable. Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would generate short-term emissions that exceed SCAQMD’S regional significance thresholds for NOx, PM , and PM ,10 2.5 171 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 943 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and would significantly contribute to the nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin for ozone and particulate matter (PM and PM ). Construction activities associated with102.5 grading operations could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations of PM10 at the existing onsite residence and the surrounding offsite residences. Mitigation measures would reduce the Project’s construction-related impacts, but the project- and cumulative-level impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. However, benefits obtained from the Project are sufficient to justify approval of the Project, and these impacts are overridden by Project benefits described in Sections II.B and II.D of this document. The Commission concurs with the preceding finding. b.Cumulative Impacts. The South Coast Air Basin is in nonattainment for O3 and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). Construction of cumulative projects will further degrade the regional and local air quality. Air quality will be temporarily impacted during construction activities. Even with the implementation of mitigation measures, Project-related construction emissions would still exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds for NOx, PM10 and PM2.5, and cumulative emissions would result in greater exceedances. These are cumulatively considerable air quality impacts which cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. However, benefits obtained from the Project are sufficient to justify approval of the Project, and these impacts are overridden by the Project benefits described in Sections II.B and II.D of this document. The Commission concurs with the preceding finding. 3.Findings Related to Noise Impacts. Project-related construction activities would result in temporary noise increases at the existing onsite residence and surrounding noise-sensitive receptors due to the length of the construction period, that is, approximately three years. Mitigation would reduce the Project’s impact on local sensitive receptors, but this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. However, benefits obtained from the Project are sufficient to justify approval of the Project, and these impacts are overridden by the Project benefits described in Sections II.B and II.D of this document. The Commission concurs with the preceding finding. 4.Findings Related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Project-related construction activities would generate 5,660 metric tons (MTon) of CO2e and operational activity would generate about 9,559 MTons of CO2e. Mitigation measures would reduce GHG emissions from construction activities, area sources, energy use, and waste and recycling activities to levels that are less than significant; however, the vehicle GHG emissions would not be reduced to less-than-significant levels, and Project-generated vehicle emissions of GHG would create significant and unavoidable impacts. However, benefits obtained from the Project are sufficient to justify approval of the Project, and these impacts are overridden by the Project benefits described in Sections II.B and II.D of this document. The Commission concurs with the preceding finding. 172 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 944 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations California Public Resource Code 21002 provides: “In the event specific economic, social and other conditions make infeasible such Project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects can be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.” Section 21002.1(c) provides: “In the event that economic, social, or other conditions make it infeasible to mitigate one or more significant effects of a project on the environment, the project may nonetheless be approved or carried out at the discretion of a public agency…” Finally, California Administrative Code, Title 4, 15093 (a) states: “If the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered ‘acceptable.’” The Project benefits include substantial infrastructure that the Project will directly and indirectly, through funding mechanisms, provide. In particular, the Project scope includes substantial infrastructure improvements for water storage and delivery systems that will not only serve the Project itself, but also benefit the larger community. The additional water storage and delivery systems will provide for more effective wildfire controls for existing residents as well as the proposed Project given the additional safety and setback measures that are incorporated into the Project. The water infrastructure will also provide a source potable water for existing residents as well as a water source for firefighting personnel in the event of a wildfire. The Project components related to fire hazards and safety, including construction, buffer zones, and other features will also provide additional benefits to those residents already located in the area as a means of preventing the spread of any wildfires through the area. Storm drainage improvements will also provide additional benefits related to the existing flood and erosion conditions prevalent in the area. The area and existing residents have face historical issues with flooding, landslides and wildfires which will be substantially improved with the implementation of the proposed Project. Funding mechanisms and impact fees that will be generated as part of the project will assist in roadway improvements and as well general fund contributions through property tax that can assist in funding necessary police, fire and safety services for the area. The proposed Project will also provide additional recreational sources for the community, creating hiking, equestrian and biking trails throughout the site and connecting an area that currently does not offer such sources of recreation to the residents of the City. Furthermore, a base of high-quality low-density residential development is important for the ability of the City’s institutions to hire and retain top quality candidates for positions at the University and other institutions. There are few other proposed developments within the City at this time and thus the proposed Project will fill a residential need within the City as is envisioned within the City’s General Plan. In addition to the safety, recreational, social and housing features that the project will provide, the Project will offer employment during the construction phases and provide revenue from the additional property taxes that the Project will generate. The Project will be required to pay additional fees to support police services in the amount of $183,506.18, pay schools fees, pay library fees in the amount of $181,375.52, improvement existing roadways and provide additional access points that otherwise may not occur, as well as pay other City development 173 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 945 Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations fees. The payment of fees and additional services benefit both the Project and the surrounding community. As the CEQA Responsible Agency for the proposed Project, the Commission has reviewed the Project description and the Project alternatives as presented in the EIR, and fully understands the Project and Project alternatives proposed for development. Further, the Commission finds that all potential adverse environmental impacts and all feasible mitigation measures to reduce the impacts from the Project have been identified in the Draft EIR, the Final EIR and public testimony. The Commission also finds that a reasonable range of alternatives was considered in the EIR and this document, Section IV.E above, and finds that approval of LAFCO 3188A is appropriate. The City has identified economic and social benefits, important policy objectives and local and regional benefits that will result from approval of the Development Agreement, as discussed in Sections II.B and II.D above, which result from implementing the Project. The Commission concurs with this finding. The Commission has balanced these substantial social and economic benefits against the unavoidable significant adverse effects of the Project. The Commission finds that the substantial social and economic benefits that will result from the Project override the unavoidable environmental effects of the Project. V.APPROVING THE PROJECT Based on the entire record before the San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission, including the Findings and all written and evidence presented, the Commission hereby approves LAFCO 3188A with the finding that the City will implement all the mitigation measures and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. VI.REGARDING STAFF DIRECTION A Notice of Determination shall be filed with the Clerk of the County of San Bernardino Board within five (5) working days of final Project approval. VII. REGARDING CONTENTS AND CUSTODIAN OF RECORD The documents and materials that constitute the record for the Commission’s actions related to the Complete FEIR are located at the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County, 1170 West 3rd Street, Unit 150, San Bernardino, California 92415-0490. The custodian for these records is the San Bernardino County LAFCO. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21081.6. 174 M681-000 -- 1000746.1        Packet Page. 946 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO’S APPROVAL OF THE SPRING TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN  Notice of Determination  Spring Trials Specific Plan Resolution  Spring Trials Specific Plan Ordinance  Spring Trials Specific Plan Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations  Spring Trials Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program  Spring Trials Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report  Spring Trials Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report o Appendix A - Initial Study and Notice of Preparation o Appendix B - Comments on the Initial Study and Notice of Preparation o Appendix C - Air Quality Modeling Result o Appendix D1 - Arborist Report (Integrated Urban Forestry 1998) o Appendix D2 - General Biological Assessment (MBA 2007) o Appendix D3 - Least Bell’s Vireo & Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Focused Survey (MBA 2007) o Appendix D4 - Updated Arborist Report (MBA 2007) o Appendix D5 - Habitat Assessment Report (MBA 2008) o Appendix D6 - General Biological Resources Assessment Update (NRA 2004) o Appendix D7 - Jurisdictional Delineation for the Access Roads (PBS&J 2011) o Appendix D8 - Jurisdictional Delineation for the Project Site (PBS&J 2009) o Appendix D9 - San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Survey Report (PBS&J 2009) o Appendix D10 - Rare Plant Survey Report o Appendix D11 - Biological Resources Review (PBS&J 2009) o Appendix D12 - Biological Resources Assessment (compiled) (PBS&J 2011) o Appendix D13 - Biological Resources Assessment (PCR 1999) o Appendix D14 - San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Survey Report (SCD 2002) o Appendix D15 - Biological Report Update (WLB 2002) o Appendix D16 - Coastal California Gnatcatcher Survey (WLB 2002) o Appendix D17 - Biological Report for the Access Roads (WLB 2002) o Appendix E - Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Assessment o Appendix F1 - Geotechnical Report (Kleinfelder 2000) o Appendix F2 - Seismic Design Parameters (Leighton and Associates 2009) o Appendix G - Spring Trails Fire Protection Plan o Appendix H1 - Precise Fuel Modification – Sheet 1 (on CD only) o Appendix H2 - Precise Fuel Modification – Sheet 2 (on CD only) o Appendix I1 - Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan o Appendix I2 - Hydrologic and Water Quality Report o Appendix J - Noise Monitoring Results o Appendix K - Traffic Impact Analysis o Appendix L - Sewer Capacity Study        Packet Page. 947 Draft Resolution No. 3291 Attachment 4        Packet Page. 948 LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION FOR SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 1170 West Third Street, Unit 150, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0490 (909) 388-0480  Fax (909) 388-0481 lafco@lafco.sbcounty.gov www.sbclafco.org PROPOSAL NO.: LAFCO 3188A HEARING DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2019 RESOLUTION NO. 3291 A RESOLUTION OF THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO MAKING DETERMINATIONS ON LAFCO 3188A - REORGANIZATION TO INCLUDE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND TO THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT ZONE FP-5 SAN BERNARDINO, AND DETACHMENT FROM COUNTY SERVICE AREA 70 (SPRING TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN). The reorganization area encompasses approximately 350 acres, which is generally located north of the Verdemont neighborhood, east of the community of Devore and northeasterly of the I-215 Freeway. The area is bordered by parcel lines on the north and east, a combination of parcel lines and the centerline of West Meyers Road (existing City of San Bernardino boundary) on the south, and parcel lines (portion of existing City of San Bernardino boundary) on the west, within the City of San Bernardino’s existing sphere of influence. On motion of Commissioner _______, duly seconded by Commissioner _____, and carried, the Local Agency Formation Commission adopts the following resolution: WHEREAS, an application for the proposed reorganization in San Bernardino County was filed with the Executive Officer of this Local Agency Formation Commission (hereinafter referred to as “the Commission”) in accordance with the Cortese-Knox- Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Government Code Sections 56000 et seq.), and the Executive Officer has examined the application and executed his certificate in accordance with law, determining and certifying that the filings are sufficient; and, WHEREAS, at the times and in the form and manner provided by law, the Executive Officer has given notice of the public hearing by the Commission on this matter; and, WHEREAS, the Executive Officer has reviewed available information and prepared a report including his recommendations thereon, the filings and report and related information having been presented to and considered by this Commission; and, 1        Packet Page. 949 RESOLUTION NO. 3291 WHEREAS, the public hearing by this Commission was originally called for August 21, 2019 and continued to October 16, 2019 at the time and place specified in the notice of public hearing; and, WHEREAS, at the hearing, this Commission heard and received all oral and written support and/or opposition; the Commission considered all plans and proposed changes of organization, objections and evidence which were made, presented, or filed; it received evidence as to whether the territory is inhabited or uninhabited, improved or unimproved; and all persons present were given an opportunity to hear and be heard in respect to any matter relating to the application, in evidence presented at the hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Commission does hereby determine, find, resolve, and order as follows: DETERMINATIONS: SECTION 1. The proposal is approved subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter specified: CONDITIONS: Condition No. 1. The boundaries of this change of organization are approved as set forth in Exhibits “A” and “A-1” attached. Condition No. 2. The following distinctive short-form designation shall be used throughout this proceeding: LAFCO 3188A. Condition No. 3. All previously authorized charges, fees, assessments, and/or taxes currently in effect by the City of San Bernardino (annexing agency) shall be assumed by the annexing territory in the same manner as provided in the original authorization pursuant to Government Code Section 56886(t). Condition No. 4. The City of San Bernardino shall be required to initiate annexation of the totally-surrounded island within one year of the Commission’s approval of LAFCO 3188A (a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B). A resolution by the City Council of the City of San Bernardino shall be submitted to the Executive Officer of LAFCO outlining the City’s commitment to fulfilling this requirement prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Completion for LAFCO 3188A. A status report shall be provided to the Commission at the six month date outlining the progress of the City of San Bernardino in fulfilling its obligation. Failure on the part of the City of San Bernardino to fulfill its commitment to annex the totally- surrounded island shall require that the next annexation proposed to the City of San Bernardino, either by the City through resolution or by property owner/registered voter petition, include a condition requiring the initiation of annexation of the totally-surrounded island. Said condition of approval shall be deemed completed upon the issuance of the Certificate of Filing for said island. Condition No. 5. The City of San Bernardino shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County from any legal expense, legal action, or judgment arising out of the Commission’s approval of this proposal, including any reimbursement of legal fees and costs incurred by the Commission. 2        Packet Page. 950 RESOLUTION NO. 3291 Condition No. 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 56886.1, public utilities, as defined in Section 216 of the Public Utilities Code, have ninety (90) days following the recording of the Certificate of Completion to make the necessary changes to impacted utility customer accounts. Condition No. 7. The date of issuance of the Certification of Completion shall be the effective date of the reorganization. SECTION 2. The Commission determines that approval of LAFCO 3188A will create an unincorporated island completely surrounded by the City of San Bernardino. Since the inclusion of the island area would likely terminate the annexation proposal due to the number of registered voters within said island, the Commission determines, pursuant to the provision of Government Code Section 56375(m), to waive the restrictions on the creation of a totally-surrounded island contained within Government Code Section 56744 because it would be detrimental to the orderly development of the community, and it further determines that the area to be surrounded by the City of San Bernardino cannot reasonably be annexed to another city or incorporated as a new city. SECTION 3. The Commission determines that: a) b) c) this proposal is certified to be legally uninhabited; it has 100 % landowner consent; and, no written opposition to a waiver of protest proceedings has been submitted by any subject agency. Therefore, the Commission does hereby waive the protest proceedings for this action as permitted by Government Code Section 56662(d). SECTION 4. DETERMINATIONS. The following determinations are required to be provided by Commission policy and Government Code Section 56668: 1. 2. The reorganization area is legally uninhabited containing four (4) registered voters as certified by the Registrar of Voters as of July 22, 2019. The County Assessor’s Office has determined that the total assessed valuation of land within the reorganization area is $1,978,576 as of August 9, 2019, broken down as: $1,876,890 (land) and $101,686 (improvements). 3. 4. The reorganization area is within the sphere of influence assigned the City of San Bernardino. Legal notice of the Commission’s consideration of the proposal has been provided through publication in the The Sun, a newspaper of general circulation within the area. As required by State law, individual notification was provided to affected and interested agencies, County departments, and those individuals and agencies having requested such notice. 5.In compliance with the requirements of Government Code Section 56157 and Commission policies, LAFCO staff has provided individual notice to: 3        Packet Page. 951 RESOLUTION NO. 3291   landowners (2) and registered voters (4) within the reorganization area (totaling 6 notices); and, landowners (84) and registered voters (96) surrounding the reorganization area 1,350 feet from the exterior boundary of the proposal area (totaling 180 notices). Comments from registered voters, landowners, and other individuals and any affected local agency in support or opposition have been reviewed and considered by the Commission in making its determination. 6. 7. The City of San Bernardino pre-zoned the reorganization area through its approval of the Spring Trails Specific Plan with the following underlying specific pan zone designations: Residential (Estate), Open Space, and Parks. These zoning designations are consistent with the City’s General Plan and are generally compatible with the surrounding land uses in the area. The City’s pre-zone designations will remain in effect for a minimum of two years following annexation unless specific actions are taken by the City Council. The Southern California Associated Governments (“SCAG”) adopted its 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy pursuant to Government Code Section 65080. LAFCO 3188A is in close proximity with the I- 215 Freeway, which is part of the RTP-SCS’s highway improvement (expansion/rehabilitation) program adding high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes between the I-210 and the I-15 Freeways for completion by 2035. 8. 9. The City of San Bernardino adopted an updated Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) in October 2016 (Resolution No. 2016-209), which was developed by County Fire, the City’s fire service provider. Said LHMP includes the Spring Trails project as one its potential residential development. County Fire also has its Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan approved by FEMA in July 2017. A Complete Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified as adequate by the City of San Bernardino for its approval of the Spring Trails Specific Plan (SCH No. 2009111086). The Commission, its staff, and its Environmental Consultant have independently reviewed the City’s Complete Final EIR and found it to be adequate for the reorganization decision. The Commission certifies that it has reviewed and considered the City’s Complete Final EIR and the effects outlined therein, and as referenced in the Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, prior to reaching a decision on the project. By considering the Complete Final EIR adopted by the City of San Bernardino and adopting the revised Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the proposal, the Commission is reconfirming its position regarding the adequacy of the City’s Complete Final EIR and originally-approved Statement of Overriding Considerations in light of the reduced Project scope, for purposes of its approval of LAFCO 3188A as a Responsible Agency under CEQA. 4        Packet Page. 952 RESOLUTION NO. 3291 The Commission hereby acknowledges the mitigation measures and mitigation monitoring and reporting program contained in the City’s Complete Final EIR and finds that no additional feasible alternatives or mitigation measures will be adopted by the Commission. The Commission finds that all changes, alterations, and mitigation measures are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City and other agencies, and not the Commission. The Commission finds that it is the responsibility of the City to oversee and implement these measures and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program. The Commission hereby adopts the Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the environmental effects of the reorganization (a copy of which is attached as Exhibit C). The Commission finds that all feasible changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project; that these changes are the responsibility of the City and other agencies identified in the Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and the City’s Complete Final EIR; and that specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible adoption of the alternatives identified in the City’s Complete Final EIR. The Commission directs its Executive Officer to file a Notice of Determination within five (5) days with the San Bernardino County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. The Commission, as a Responsible Agency, also notes that this proposal is exempt from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife fees because the fees were the responsibility of the City of San Bernardino as a CEQA Lead Agency. 10.The reorganization area is served by the following local agencies: County of San Bernardino, Inland Empire Resource Conservation District, San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, San Bernardino County Fire Protection District, its Valley Service Zone, and its Zone FP-5 (fire protection and emergency medical response), and County Service Area 70 (multi-function unincorporated County-wide). County Service Area 70 will be detached and its sphere of influence reduced upon successful completion of this proposal. None of the other agencies will be directly affected by the completion of this proposal as they are regional in nature. 11.The City of San Bernardino has submitted a plan for the extension of municipal services to the study area as required by Government Code Section 56653, which indicate that the City of San Bernardino can, at a minimum, maintain the existing level of service delivery and can improve the level and range of services currently available in the area. The certified Plan for Service and Fiscal Impact Analysis have been reviewed and compared with the standards established by the Commission and the factors contained within Government Code Section 56668. The Plan for Service and the Fiscal Impact Analysis conform to those adopted standards and requirements. 12.The reorganization proposal complies with Commission policies that indicate the preference for areas proposed for development at an urban-level land use be included within a City so that the full range of municipal services can be planned, funded, extended and maintained. 5        Packet Page. 953 RESOLUTION NO. 3291 However, approval of this proposal will create an island of unincorporated territory that will be totally-surrounded by the City of San Bernardino. LAFCO 3188A cannot be expanded to include the unincorporated island without the risk of termination due to known registered voter protest within the island area. 13.The reorganization area can benefit from the availability and extension of municipal services from the City of San Bernardino and its Municipal Water Department as evidenced by the Plan for Service certified by the City and its Municipal Water Department. 14. 15. This proposal will assist the City of San Bernardino’s ability to achieve its fair share of the regional housing needs as it proposes to build the addition of 215 single-family residential units. With respect to environmental justice, which is the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the location of public facilities and the provision of public services, the following demographic and income profile was generated using ESRI’s Community Analyst for the City of San Bernardino and the reorganization and adjacent unincorporated areas (2019 data): Demographic and Income Comparison City of San Bernardino (%) Reorganization Area and Adjacent Unincorporated Area (%) Race and Ethnicity • African American Alone • American Indian Alone • Asian Alone • Pacific Islander Alone • Hispanic Origin (Any Race) Median Household Income 13.5 % 1.3 % 4.2 % 0.4 % 68.3 % $43,515 7.0 % 0.9 % 4.3 % 0.3 % 37.9 % $104,564 Through future development, the reorganization area will benefit from the extension of services and facilities from the City and, at the same time, the approval of the reorganization proposal will not result in the unfair treatment of any person based on race, culture or income. 16. 17. The County of San Bernardino (for itself and on behalf of the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District) and the City of San Bernardino have successfully negotiated a transfer of property tax revenues that will be implemented upon completion of this reorganization. This fulfills the requirements of Section 99 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. The map and legal description, as revised, are in substantial compliance with LAFCO and State standards through certification by the County Surveyor’s Office. SECTION 5. The primary reason for this reorganization is to receive municipal services from the City for the proposed Spring Trails Specific Plan. The Commission recognizes that the area is difficult to develop due to constraints, among others, of being on an active fault line and located in a fire hazard area with slopes and high winds. The Commission 6        Packet Page. 954 RESOLUTION NO. 3291 staff emphasizes the importance of the mitigation measures being implemented to minimize or reduce the impacts to the extent feasible. SECTION 6. The affected territory shall not be taxed for existing bonded indebtedness or contractual obligations of the City of San Bernardino through the reorganization. The regular County assessment rolls are utilized by the City of San Bernardino. SECTION 7. Approval by the Local Agency Formation Commission indicates that completion of this proposal would accomplish the proposed change of organization in a reasonable manner with a maximum chance of success and a minimum disruption of service to the functions of other local agencies in the area. SECTION 8. The Commission hereby orders the territory described in Exhibits “A” and “A-1” reorganized. The Commission hereby directs, that following completion of the reconsideration period specified by Government Code Section 56895(b), the Executive Officer shall prepare and file a Certificate of Completion, as required by Government Code Section 57176 through 57203, and a Statement of Boundary Change, as required by Government Code Section 57204. SECTION 8. The Executive Officer is hereby authorized and directed to mail certified copies of this resolution in the manner provided by Section 56882 of the Government Code. THIS ACTION APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County by the following vote: AYES:COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) I, SAMUEL MARTINEZ, Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County, California, do hereby certify this record to be a full, true, and correct copy of the action taken by said Commission by vote of the members present as the same appears in the Official Minutes of said Commission at its regular meeting of October 16, 2019. DATED: _________________________________ SAMUEL MARTINEZ Executive Officer 7        Packet Page. 955 ANNEXATION OF THE SPRING TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT AND THE 26- ACRE TOTALLY SURROUNDED ISLAND WARD 5        Packet Page. 956 Project Overview In March 2013, the City of San Bernardino approved  the Spring Trails Specific Plan (SP 10-01), which  included a variety of underlying entitlements.  The  Specific Plan approvals included the adoption of  Resolution No. 2013-34 that certified the Final  Environmental Impact Report, the adoption of a  Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, and the  adoption of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 02-09)  (including the pre-annexation of the Specific Plan  area); approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 15576; and  approval of a Development Agreement. SPRING TRAILS ANNEXATION        Packet Page. 957 SPRING TRAILS ANNEXATION LAFCO ACTION On October 16, 2019, LAFCO adopted Resolution No.  3091 approving the annexation of the Spring Trails  Specific Plan Project Area (LAFCO Annexation No.  3188A) into the City of San Bernardino, subject to  certain conditions of approval.   During the processing of the annexation, a 26-acre  area, including six parcels was removed from the  annexation resulting in an unincorporated island  surrounded by the City of San Bernardino.        Packet Page. 958 SPRING TRAILS ANNEXATION PLAN FOR SERVICE After annexation, the City of San Bernardino is anticipated to  provide services including general government, community  development, police protection, local parks and recreation,  community services and public works’ services. The City of  San Bernardino has annexed into the San Bernardino  County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD) and its Service  Zone FP-5 for fire protection and emergency medical  response services. Since the Spring Trails annexation area is  already within SBCFPD and Service Zone FP-5, the  SBCFPD will continue to be the service provider for fire  protection and emergency medical services.  The County of San Bernardino will continue to provide other  services such as regional parks and recreation, regional  flood control and drainage and health and welfare.         Packet Page. 959 SPRING TRAILS ANNEXATION SALES AND USER TAX As shown in Table 2-5, estimated annual offsite retail  sales and use tax from taxable purchases made by  future Spring Trails Specific Plan residents are  projected at $62,332 after buildout. This estimate is  based on total household income projected at about  $48.97 million after buildout (28 percent of residential  valuation of about $167.75 million). At 33 percent of  household income, the projected retail taxable  purchases made by Spring Trails’ residents are  projected at about $15.5 million after buildout. The  fiscal analysis assumes that 35 percent of the retail  taxable purchases, or about $5.42 million, will be made  annually in the City at buildout.        Packet Page. 960 SPRING TRAILS ANNEXATION CITY GENERAL FUND IMPACT A recurring surplus of $37,705 is projected to the City General Fund for the Spring Trails Annexation after buildout, as shown in Table 5-1. The projected surplus after buildout is based on recurring revenues of about $493,179 and recurring costs of about $455,474. This projection includes assumed revenues from the recently adopted CFD 2018-1 tax for safety services. The revenue- to-cost ratio is estimated at about 1.08 after buildout. A small surplus of $827 is projected for Year 1, which is planned for onsite grading and offsite infrastructure capital improvements. With completion of new housing units in Year 2 (Phase 1), a surplus of $3,328 is projected. The projected surplus increases to $9,949 for Phase 2 (Year 3) and by Phase 3 (Year 4) a surplus of $20,351 is projected. When the final units are developed in Phase 4 (Year 5), the projected surplus to the General Fund is $37,705.        Packet Page. 961 SPRING TRAILS ANNEXATION CITY COST ASSUMPTIONS The General Fund cost factors that are used in preparing the fiscal  analysis for the Spring Trails Annexation are presented in Table 6-3.  These factors are based on the City’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23  Adopted Budget net expenditures shown in Table 6-3 and the City’s  population and service population estimates that are presented in  Table 6-1. City General Fund expenditures are projected for general  government, or overhead functions; community development; police;  parks, recreation and community services; public works; and  transfers from the General Fund to the Animal Control Fund and to  Library services. Water and sewer operations are assumed to not  impact the General Fund because they are enterprise functions and  maintenance costs are assumed to be covered through the payment  of user fees and charges. Fire protection to the City is provided by  the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District, and these costs  are not included in this analysis.        Packet Page. 962 SPRING TRAILS ANNEXATION LAFCO Action Ø As part of the annexation, LAFCO imposed Condition of  Approval No. 4, requiring the City to initiate annexation of the  totally surrounded island within on year of the Commission’s  approval of the Spring Trails Annexation (LAFCO 3188A). City Actions Since LAFCO’s Approved Action Ø January 15, 2020 – City considered the annexation of the  remaining unincorporated  island abutting the Spring Trails  Specific Plan Project. Ø March 18, 2020 – Council discussed the item in closed  session because of threat of litigation.  Ø May 6, 2020 – Item considered by the City Council and  tabled.        Packet Page. 963 The Spring Hills Specific Plan  Project, approved in March  2023, requires annexation into  the City limits. LAFCO requires  the City to initiate the annexation  of both the Spring Trails Specific  Plan Area and an abutting 26- acres of totally surrounded area. SPRING TRAILS ANNEXATION 2021 – 2025 Strategic Targets and Goals Ø Annexation is consistent with Key Target No.1 –  Secure a long-term revenue source. The area is  within the City’s Sphere of Influence and anticipated  for development as identified in the General Plan.  Ø Key  Target No. 4(b) – Update the General Plan and  Development Code as it ensures this property  meets the General Plan uses and will be included in  a future City annexation.        Packet Page. 964 SPRING TRAILS ANNEXATION Recommendations Ø That the Mayor and City Council adopt Resolution making  application to the LAFCO Commission for San Bernardino  County for reorganization to include Annexation to the City  of San Bernardino and Detachment from County Service  Area 70, generally known as the Spring Trails Specific  Plan.   Ø That the Mayor and City Council adopt Resolution making  application to the LAFCO Commission of San Bernardino  County for reorganization to include Annexation to the City  of San Bernardino and Detachment from County Service  Area 70, known as the 26-acre totally surrounded island. Ø Direct City Manager to transmit the Resolution to the  Director of LAFCO.        Packet Page. 965 SPRING TRAILS ANNEXATION (1) The administrative record has been completed in  compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the  City’s Local CEQA Guidelines.    (2) The application for annexation is covered by the certified  Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse  #2009111086) for the Spring Trails Specific Plan Project  (Specific Plan No. SP10-01; General Plan Amendment No.  GPA 02-09, including pre-annexation of the Spring Trails  site; Tentative Tract Map No. 15576 (Subdivision No. 02- 09); and Development Agreement No. 11-01) approved  February 19, 2013. No further environmental review is  required for the project pursuant to Public Resources Code  section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15162.    (3) The determination of CEQA exemption reflects the  independent judgment of the City Council.  CEQA Ø As the decision-making body for the project, the  City Council has reviewed and considered the  information contained in the administrative record  for the proposed project. Based upon the facts and  information contained in the administrative record,  including all written and oral evidence presented to  the City Council.         Packet Page. 966 SPRING TRAILS ANNEXATION Thank you. Questions?        Packet Page. 967 2 4 0 3 DISCUSSION City of San Bernardino Request for Council Action Date:November 6, 2024 To:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From:Andrea Russell, Director of Human Resources; Rochelle Clayton, Acting City Manager Department:City Manager's Office Subject:Confirm Appointment and Approve Employment Agreement for the Position of City Manager Recommendation: It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approve and authorize the Mayor to execute an employment agreement for the position of City Manager with Rochelle Clayton, with an effective date of October 2, 2024, as decided by the City Council and reported in public on the same date. Executive Summary During its Closed Session meeting on Wednesday, October 2, 2024, the Mayor and City Council voted unanimously to appoint Rochelle Clayton as the City Manager. The City Council directed the City Attorney to prepare an employment contract with a salary of $325,000 and certain terms of the agreement identical to the terms provided for in the previous city manager agreement, to be approved at the next scheduled Mayor and City Council Meeting. Background Rochelle Clayton was appointed as the Acting City Manager on May 22, 2024. The Mayor and City Council discussed the appointment of a City Manager and provided direction for consideration to be discussed in September 2024, leading to the 8-0 vote to appoint Ms. Clayton as the City Manager on October 2, 2024. Discussion The Employment Agreement presented sets forth the terms of employment, effective October 2, 2024. The Employment Agreement provides for all of the following: Term: Section 2: There is no specific term for a set period of years. Instead the Agreement will continue indefinitely until terminated.        Packet Page. 968 2 4 0 3 Compensation: Section 3: Salary will initially be $325,000. On October 2, 2025 the salary will increase by the consumer price index with a cap of 5% and this will continue for each year that the Agreement is in effect. Benefits: Section 3.2: Benefits will be the same as those provided under the Executive Benefits Resolution which is attached. Car Allowance: Section 6: A vehicle allowance in the amount of $775.00 per month per Resolution No. 2024-034 or as amended. Relocation Benefit: Section 7: One-time relocation benefit of $10,000, if relocation to a residence within the boundaries of the City is accomplished before October 2, 2026. Severance Payment: Section 11.7: Provides for a severance payment of six-months base salary only (no other benefits or payments) if the Agreement is terminated without cause. GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953(c)(3) ANNOUNCEMENT Effective January 1, 2017, Government Code Section 54953(c)(3) requires the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tempore, or other presiding officer to orally report a summary of a recommendation for a final action on the salaries, salary schedules, or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits of a local agency executive, as defined in Section 3511.1(d) of the Government Code, during the open regular meeting in which the final action is to be taken and prior to the motion to approve. ORAL REPORT BY MAYOR Prior to a motion to approve the City Manager Employment Agreement, the Mayor shall make an oral summary report of the Salary, Benefits, and Severance provisions of the City Manager Employment Agreement that are unique to this agreement. “In accordance with Government Code Section 54953(c)(3), a summary of the City Manager’s salary and benefits is reported as follows: The annual salary of the assignment of City Manager will be $325,000. The City Manager will receive a monthly auto allowance as set forth in Resolution 2024-034 and an annual cost of living adjustment set at the designated CPI, subject to a 5% maximum cap. The City Manager will receive all other benefits and compensation that are applicable as set forth in the Executive Compensation and Benefits Plan approved by Resolution 2022-59 and is eligible for a severance payment equal to six months base pay.        Packet Page. 969 2 4 0 3 These benefits are set forth in detail in Resolutions 2024-034 and 2022-59 attached to this staff report.” 2021-2025 Strategic Targets and Goals The authorization to execute the Employment Agreement aligns with Key Target No. 2: Focused Aligned Leadership and Unified Community. Fiscal Impact The salary and benefits for the City Manager are included in the FY 2024/25 Operating Budget. Conclusion It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino, California, approve and authorize the Mayor to execute an employment agreement for the position of City Manager with Rochelle Clayton, with an effective date of October 2, 2024, as decided by the City Council and reported in public on the same date. Attachments Attachment 1 - Employment Agreement Attachment 2 - Resolution 2022-59 Attachment 3 - Resolution 2024-034 Ward: All Wards Synopsis of Previous Council Actions: May 22, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Appointed to Acting City Manager October 2, 2024 Mayor and City Council of the City of San Bernardino Voted to Appoint as City Manager        Packet Page. 970 Final Version 10/30/2024 (SRC) CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT This City Manager Employment Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into as of the 6th day of November, 2024 (the “Effective Date”), between the City of San Bernardino (hereinafter referred to as the “City”) and Rochelle Clayton (hereinafter referred to as the “City Manager” or the “Employee”). City and City Manager/Employee are sometimes referred to in this Agreement as “Party” and collectively as “Parties.” RECITALS WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Mayor and City Council of the City to retain the services of Employee as City Manager; and WHEREAS, Employee is competent, trained and qualified for the position of City Manager; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Mayor and City Council to provide certain benefits, establish certain conditions of employment and to set certain working conditions of the City Manager. NOW, THEREFORE, the above named Parties hereby mutually agree and promise as follows: 1. Duties, Acceptance of Appointment, Hours of Work, Regional Liaison. 1.1 Duties. The City Manager shall perform those duties and have those responsibilities that are commonly assigned to a city manager of a city in California, and as may be further set forth in the City’s Charter and Municipal Code. City Manager shall perform such other legally permissible and proper duties and functions consistent with the Office of the City Manager, as the Mayor and City Council shall from time to time assign. It is expected that City Manager shall abide by the ICMA Code of Ethics. City Manager is encouraged to participate in community and civic affairs. 1.2 Acceptance of Appointment. City Manager hereby accepts the appointment as City Manager of the City of San Bernardino subject to all terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. 1.3 Hours of Work It is recognized that City Manager devotes a great deal of time outside the normal office hours-schedule, and to that end, Employee shall be allowed to establish an appropriate work schedule recognizing the normal City work schedule and community meetings.        Packet Page. 971 Final Version 10/30/2024 (SRC) 1.4 Devotion to City Business The City Manager’s position is full-time. City Manager shall not engage in any business, educational, professional, charitable, or other activities that would conflict or materially interfere with performance of her City Manager duties, except as may be specifically authorized by the Mayor and City Council. 2. Term. This Agreement shall be deemed effective on October 2, 2024 (“Commencement Date”) and shall continue unless terminated earlier in accordance with Section 11. 3. Compensation. 3.1 Salary City agrees to pay City Manager, and City Manager agrees to accept from City, as compensation for services rendered by City Manager pursuant to this Agreement, an annual base salary, commencing on the Commencement Date, the annual base salary shall be in the amount of Three Hundred and Twenty Five Thousand Dollars ($325,000.00) (hereinafter “Annual Base Salary”), payable in installment payments in the same manner and at the same times as salaries of other executive managers of the City are paid. Commencing October 2, 2025 and each year thereafter, said Annual Base Salary shall be automatically increased by the percentage change to the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI–U) for the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario area for the preceding 12 months ending in July (subject to a 5% maximum cap) (“CPI Increase”). The term “Annual Base Salary” as used in this Agreement shall also include any such adjustments approved by the Mayor and City Council other than payments not eligible to be added to the City Manager’s Annual Base Salary pursuant to the terms of any applicable salary resolution of City. Any salary adjustment shall be memorialized by an amendment to this Agreement. 3.2 Benefits Except for such benefits as are inconsistent with this Agreement (including, for example any CPI Increase) or the position of City Manager, City Manager shall receive all such other benefits and compensation that are generally applicable to new Executive employees of the City as set forth in the Executive Compensation and Benefits Plan approved by Resolution No. 2022-59 (as amended by the Side Letter executed October 18, - 2 -        Packet Page. 972 Final Version 10/30/2024 (SRC) 2022), as the same may be modified from time to time after the date of this Agreement, including but not limited to CalPERS retirement benefits, health insurance, life insurance, holidays, administrative leave, vacation leave, executive leave, and sick leave. In the event the City Manager’s employment is terminated, either voluntarily or involuntarily, the City Manager shall be compensated for accrued leave in accordance with the Executive Compensation and Benefits Plan. 4. Performance Evaluation. The Mayor and Council shall review the City Manager’s job performance at least once annually. The City Manager shall remind the Mayor and Council of its obligations under this Section each year and shall work with the Mayor and Council in finding an appropriate time to place her annual evaluation on the agenda. The Mayor and Council shall in writing and in accordance with criteria established by the Mayor and Council in consultation with the City Manager, develop the annual performance reviews and evaluations. The Mayor and Council shall provide the City Manager a reasonable and adequate opportunity to discuss the City Manager's evaluation with the Mayor and Council. The annual performance reviews and evaluations shall be reasonably related to the City Manager's written job description and shall be based, in whole or in part, on goals for the City Manager's performance that are jointly developed and adopted by the Mayor and Council and the City Manager. 5. Bonds. City shall bear the full cost of any fidelity or other bonds required of City Manager under any law or ordinance. 6. Vehicle Allowance. City agrees to pay to the City Manager, during the term of this Agreement and in addition to other salary and benefits herein provided a vehicle allowance as provided in Resolution No. 2024-034 (currently at $775.00 per month) or as amended or its successor. 7. Relocation Benefit. As an incentive for City Manager to relocate her primary residency to location within the boundaries of the City of San Bernardino, City shall pay City Manager a one-time relocation benefit of $10,000. The relocation benefit shall be available until October 2, 2026. If City Manager has not relocated to the City within said period of time the relocation benefit shall expire. If City Manager relocates as provided under this Section, City shall process payment of the relocation payment within 30-days of the City Manager showing proof of relocation as demonstrated by a change of voter registration, an address on a California driver’s license or proof of residential utilities in her name at an address within the City.        Packet Page. 973 Final Version 10/30/2024 (SRC) 8. General Business Expenses 8.1 City agrees to budget and pay for professional dues and subscriptions for City Manager necessary for Employee’s continuation and participation in national, regional, state and local boards, task-forces, conferences and meetings, associations and organizations desirable for City Manager’s continued participation, professional growth, and advancement, and for the benefit of the City. 8.2 City agrees to budget and pay for travel and subsistence expenses of City Manager for professional and official travel, board and task-force meetings, conferences, and occasions to adequately continue the professional development of City Manager and to pursue necessary official functions for City. 8.3 City recognizes that the City Manager may incur expenses of a non- personal, job-related nature that are reasonably necessary to the City Manager’s service to the City. The City agrees to either pay such expenses in advance or to reimburse the expenses, so long as the expenses are incurred and submitted in accordance with the City’s normal expenditure reimbursement procedures. To be eligible for reimbursement, all expenses must be supported by documentation meeting the City’s normal requirements and must be submitted within time limits established by the City. 9. Abuse of Office or Position. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 53243, 53243.1 and 53243.2, if City Manager is convicted of a crime involving an abuse of Employee’s office or position, all of the following shall apply: (1) if Manager is provided with administrative leave pay pending an investigation, City Manager shall be required to fully reimburse City such amounts paid; and (2) if City pays for the criminal legal defense of City Manager (which would be in its sole discretion, as it is generally not obligated to pay for a criminal defense), City Manager shall be required to fully reimburse City such amounts paid; and (3) if this Agreement is terminated, any Severance Pay and Severance Benefits related to the termination that City Manager may receive from City shall be fully reimbursed to City or void if not yet paid to City Manager. For purposes of this Section, abuse of office or position means either: (1) an abuse of public authority, including waste, fraud, and violation of the law under color of authority; or (2) a crime against public justice, including, but not limited to, a crime described in Title 7 (commencing with Section 92) of Part 1 of the Penal Code. 10. Notices. Any notice required or permitted by this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally served upon the other Party, or sent by United States Postal Service, postage prepaid and addressed to the appropriate Party as follow:        Packet Page. 974 Final Version 10/30/2024 (SRC) If to City: Attn: Mayor and City Council City of San Bernardino If to City Manager: Personal Address on File City Manager Notice shall be deemed given as of the date of personal service or upon the date of deposit in the course of transmission with the United States Postal Service. 11. Termination. 11.1 At-Will Employee City Manager shall serve at the will and pleasure of the Mayor and City Council. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of the Mayor and City Council to suspend from duty, remove from office or otherwise terminate the services of City Manager at any time, at the sole discretion of the Mayor and City Council. This Agreement may be terminated as follows. 11.2 Termination – Mayor and Council Vote The Mayor and City Council may remove the City Manager with or without cause by motion adopted by five (5) affirmative votes of the Mayor and City Council. If the City Manager is terminated without cause she shall be entitled to a severance payment as provided for in Section 11.7. 11. 3 Resignation City Manager may voluntarily resign her position as City Manager, after giving City at least sixty (60) days written notice prior to the effective date of such resignation, unless such notice is waived in whole or part by the Mayor and City Council. In the event the City Manager resigns from her employment with City, the City Manager shall not be entitled to any Severance Pay. 11.4 Death If, during the Term or any extended Term, the City Manager dies, the City Manager’s estate shall receive Accrued Salary and Benefits, but shall not be entitled to any additional compensation or payment, including Severance Pay. 11.5 Disability In the event the City Manager is permanently disabled or is otherwise unable to perform her duties because of sickness, accident, injury, or mental incapacity        Packet Page. 975 Final Version 10/30/2024 (SRC) for a period of six (6) consecutive months, the City may terminate the City Manager’s employment and this Agreement. 11.6 For Cause Termination The City Council may remove the City Manager For Cause at any time without prior notice by motion adopted by the affirmative votes of a majority of the City Council. “For Cause” for purposes of this Agreement shall mean any of the following: (a) Conviction of, or plea of guilty or nobo contendre to, any crime or offense (other than minor traffic violations or similar offenses) which is likely to have a material adverse impact on the City or on the City Manager’s reputation; (b) Gross misconduct which is likely to have a material adverse impact on the City or on the City Manager’s reputation; (c) Proven failure of the Manager to observe or perform any of her duties and obligations, if that failure continues for a period of thirty (30) days from the date of his receipt of notice from the City Council specifying the acts or omissions deemed to amount to that failure; or (d) Any other action or inaction by the City Manager that materially and substantially impedes or disrupts the performance of the City and its organizational component units, is detrimental to employee or public safety, violates properly established rules or procedures, or adversely affects the reputation of the City, its officers, or its employees. Examples, include, but are not limited to lying, knowingly making misrepresentations or failing to disclose information to the City Council. 11.7 Severance Pay In the event this Agreement is terminated, without cause, pursuant to Section 11.2 of this Agreement, the City Manager shall receive a severance payment, in a lump sum, equal to six (6) months of City Manager’s then monthly Base Salary or, if lesser, an amount equal to the Annual Base Salary remaining on the unexpired term of the contract (“Severance Pay”). Such severance payment shall be City Manager’s sole remedy for termination without cause under Section 11.2 of this Agreement. The Severance Pay shall only be paid after the City Manager executes a waiver and release agreement prepared by the City Attorney in a form substantially similar to that one set forth as Exhibit “A” to this Agreement. City Manager shall not be eligible for Severance Pay if this Agreement is terminated for any reason other than, without cause, pursuant to Section 11.2 of this Agreement.        Packet Page. 976 Final Version 10/30/2024 (SRC) 12. General Provisions. 12.1 This writing constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior oral or written representations or written agreements on the subject matter hereof, which may have been entered into between the parties. No modification or revision to this Agreement shall be of any force or effect, unless the same is in writing and executed by the Parties hereto. 12.2 Each Party agrees and acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any Party, which are not embodied herein and that any agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this Agreement shall not be valid or binding on either Party. 12.3 If any provision, or portion thereof, contained in the Agreement is held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or portion thereof, shall be deemed severable, shall not be affected and shall remain in full force and effect. 12.4 This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the law of the State of California. Venue shall be in San Bernardino County. 12.5 This Agreement shall be construed as a whole, according to its fair meaning, and not in favor or against any Party. By way of example and not in limitation, this Agreement shall not be construed in favor of the party receiving a benefit or against the Party responsible for any particular language in this Agreement. 12.6 City Manager acknowledges that he has had an opportunity to consult legal counsel in regard to this Agreement, that he has read and understands this Agreement, that he is fully aware of its legal effect, and that he has entered into it freely and voluntarily and based on his own judgment and not on any representations or promises other than those contained in this Agreement. 12.7 In any dispute arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall recover its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. 13. Other Terms and Conditions of Employment The City, only upon written agreement with City Manager, shall fix any such other terms and conditions of employment, as it may determine from time to time, relating to the performance of the City Manager, provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent with or in conflict with the provisions of this Agreement, the City Code, or any other law, ordinance or City Resolution.        Packet Page. 977 Final Version 10/30/2024 (SRC) 14.Indemnification 14.1 City shall defend, hold harmless and indemnify City Manager against any tort, professional liability claim or demand or other legal action, whether groundless or otherwise, arising out of any alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of City Manager’s duties or resulting from the exercise of her judgment or discretion in connection with the performance of her duties, unless the act or omission involved unlawful conduct. City shall not unreasonably refuse to provide for legal representation at City’s expense. Legal representation, provided by City for City Manager, shall extend until a final determination of the legal action including any and all losses, damages, judgment, interests, settlements, fines, court costs, and the reasonable costs and expenses of legal proceedings, including appeals, and including attorneys’ fees, and expert witness fees and all other trial and appellate costs, and other liabilities incurred, imposed upon, or suffered by such City Manager in connection with or resulting from any claim, action, suit, or proceeding, actual or threatened, arising out of or in connection with the performance of City Manager’s duties. 14.2 City agrees to pay all reasonable litigation expenses of City Manager throughout pendency of any City-related litigation to which City Manager is a party, witness or advisor to the City. Such expense payments shall continue beyond City Manager’s employment with the City as long as litigation is pending. Post-employment, City agrees to pay City Manager for reasonable consulting fees, travel expenses and other costs, when City Manager serves as a witness, advisor or consultant to City regarding pending litigation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this City Manager Employment Agreement on this 6th day of November, 2024. EMPLOYEE/CITY MANAGER CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Rochelle Clayton, City Manager Helen Tran, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk City Attorney        Packet Page. 978 Final Version 10/30/2024 (SRC) Exhibit “A” GENERAL WAIVER AND RELEASE I, the undersigned, do hereby acknowledge and attest that I have read and understood Section 11.7 of my Employment Agreement with the City of San Bernardino and hereby agree that by accepting Severance Pay in the amount of twelve (12) months’ or, if lesser, an amount equal to the Annual Base Salary remaining on the unexpired term of the Agreement, I agree to waive all rights to further claims, remedies, or legal action against the City of San Bernardino, its officers and employees. In exchange for receipt of the Severance Pay, and all other salary and benefits owing, I and my representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns do hereby completely release and forever discharge the City of San Bernardino and its related entities and their present and former officers, directors, council members, agents, employees, attorneys, and successors (collectively, “Released Parties”) from all claims, rights, demands, actions, obligations, liabilities, and causes of action of every kind and character, known or unknown, mature or unmatured, which I may have now or in the future arising from any act or omission or condition occurring on or prior to the date this General Waivers and Release is signed whether based on tort, contract (express or implied), or any federal, state, or local law, statute, or regulation (collectively, the “Released Claims”). Released Claims shall also include, but not be limited to, claims for wages or other compensation due, severance pay, bonuses, sick leave, vacation pay, life or health insurance, or any other fringe benefit. This General Waivers and Release specifically releases and waives any and all claims arising out of my employment and separation from employment with the City of San Bernardino, including but not limited to claims arising under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), the California Labor Code, the California Family Rights Act (“CFRA”), the California Constitution, federal Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), the federal Equal Pay Act (“EPA”), the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), tort and contract claims, privacy claims, and any other applicable state, federal, local or other laws that may apply. I knowingly and voluntarily waive any and all rights or benefits that I may now have, or in the future may have, under the terms of Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, which provides as follows: A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR.        Packet Page. 979 Final Version 10/30/2024 (SRC) EXHIBIT A – TEMPLATE WAIVER AND RELEASE I acknowledge that I have read and understand this waiver and voluntarily and knowingly am waiving my right under Section 1542 to pursue unknown or unanticipated claims, rights, demands, actions, obligations, liabilities, and causes of action of any kind that may have materially affected this General Waivers and Release. Unless otherwise required by law, I shall not file any claim, sue or initiate an action against any Released Party or participate in any compliance review, action, or proceeding, individually or as a member of a class, under any contract (express or implied), or any federal, state, or local law, statute, or regulation pertaining in any manner to the Released Claims. By signing this Agreement, I certify that Employee has read all of this Agreement, understands its terms and conditions, and knowingly and voluntarily consents to such terms. Employee acknowledges that the Company has advised Employee in writing to consult with an attorney before signing this Agreement. Employee certifies that Employee has been given at least twenty-one (21) days to consider this Agreement, and that Employee’s signature below indicates either that Employee has taken twenty-one (21) days to consider this Agreement, or has knowingly and voluntarily waived some or all of this consideration period. In addition, Employee has seven (7) days from the date of signing this Agreement to revoke the Agreement, after which the Agreement will become final and binding (which shall be deemed the “Effective Date” of this Agreement). If Employee does not execute and return this Agreement upon expiration of the twenty-one (21) day period, the Agreement and any severance payment offer it contains shall be deemed rescinded and no longer offered to Employee. Approved and Agreed to By: City Manager CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Mayor [DO NOT SIGN] [FOR TEMPLATE PURPOSES ONLY]        Packet Page. 980        Packet Page. 981        Packet Page. 982        Packet Page. 983        Packet Page. 984        Packet Page. 985        Packet Page. 986        Packet Page. 987        Packet Page. 988        Packet Page. 989        Packet Page. 990        Packet Page. 991        Packet Page. 992        Packet Page. 993        Packet Page. 994        Packet Page. 995        Packet Page. 996        Packet Page. 997        Packet Page. 998        Packet Page. 999