Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2020-05-21 Council Agenda Packet
Thursday, May 21, 2020 9:00 AM City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov Council Chambers City Council President - Miguel Angel Arias Vice President - Paul Caprioglio Councilmembers: Esmeralda Z. Soria, Mike Karbassi, Luis Chavez, Garry Bredefeld, Nelson Esparza City Manager - Wilma Quan City Attorney - Douglas T. Sloan City Clerk - Yvonne Spence, MMC Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Regular Meeting May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised PUBLIC ADVISORY: THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND CITY HALL WILL NOT BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC While Emergency Order No. 2020-12 is in effect, City of Fresno public meetings will be conducted electronically and telephonically only. No one will be physically present in the Chambers, and the Chambers will not be open to the public. City Hall remains closed to the public. To observe the meeting on our City’s website click on the URL https://fresno.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx and click on the “In progress” link under “video” for the corresponding meeting. The Council meeting can also be viewed live at 9:00 A.M. on Comcast Channel 96 and AT&T Channel 99. Members of the public are encouraged to participate electronically. PUBLIC COMMENT: The following options are available for members of the public who want to address City Council: 1. eComment at https://fresno.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx. a) eComments is a tool for citizens to use to make comments on agenda items. It will be open during the Council meeting and closed at the end of the meeting and will be a part of the official record. The User Agreement and Procedures document for eComment can be accessed by the URL https://www.fresno.gov/cityclerk/ b) eComments will be a maximum of 450 words. OR 2. Join online on Zoom a) If you would like to speak on an agenda item, you can access the meeting remotely from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone, or Android device: Please use this URL https://zoom.us/j/91522881866 b) If you do not wish for your name to appear on the screen, then use the drop down menu and click on “rename” to rename yourself. c) If you wish to address Council during the public comment portion of the Page 2 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised agenda, click on the icon labeled “Participants” at the bottom center of your PC or Mac screen. At the bottom of the window on the right side of the screen, click the icon labeled “RaiseHand”. Your digital hand will now be raised. d) Those addressing Council must state their name for the record. e) To facilitate electronic access, no person shall speak until recognized by the Presiding Officer. OR 3. Join by Phone a) JOIN BY PHONE: 1-669-900-9128 Enter Meeting ID: 915 2288 1866 b) If you wish to address Council during the public comment portion of the agenda, Press *9 and we will select you from the meeting cue. c) Public comment will be limited to three minutes per person. d) Those addressing Council must state their name for the record. e) To facilitate electronic access, no person shall speak until recognized by the Presiding Officer. OR 4. Email: to clerk@fresno.gov a) Residents may also email comments to be read during the meeting. Please include the agenda date and item number you wish to speak on in the subject line of your email. b) Emails will be a maximum of 450 words. c) All comments received will be distributed to Council prior and during the meeting and will be a part of the official record. All participants will be on mute until they are called upon at which point they will Page 3 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised be unmuted. To prevent participants from having their video on, we will remove the option to show their video. Pursuant to the Executive Order, and in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, If you need additional accommodations such as interpreters, sign language signers, or the services of a translator, please contact the office of the City Clerk at (559) 621-7650 or clerk@fresno.gov. To ensure availability, you are advised to make your request at least three business days prior to the meeting. The City of Fresno thanks you in advance for taking all precautions to prevent spreading COVID-19 virus. AGENDA ITEMS MARKED WITH AN ASTERISK (***) ARE SUBJECT TO MAYORAL VETO OR RECONSIDERATION Page 4 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised ASESORIA PÚBLICA: LAS CÁMARAS DEL CONSEJO MUNICIPAL Y LA ALCALDÍA NO ESTRAN ABIERTOS AL PÚBLICO Mientras que la Orden de Emergencia No. 2020-12 esté en efecto, las reuniones públicas de la Ciudad de Fresno se llevarán a cabo solo por vía electrónica y por teléfono. Nadie estará físicamente presente en las Cámaras, y las Cámaras no estarán abiertas al público. La Alcaldía permanecerá cerrada al público. Para observar la reunión en el sitio de internet de nuestra ciudad, haga clic en el URL https://fresno.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx y haga clic en el enlace "En progreso" debajo de "video" para la junta correspondiente. La reunión del Consejo también se puede ver en vivo a las 9:00 a.m. en el Canal 96 de Comcast 96 y el Canal 99 de AT&T. Se anima a los miembros del público a participar electrónicamente. COMENTARIO PÚBLICO: Las siguientes opciones están disponibles para los miembros del público que desean dirigirse al Consejo de la Ciudad: 1. Comentario electrónico en https://fresno.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx. a) Los eComments (comentarios electrónicos) estarán abiertos durante la reunión del Consejo y se cerrarán al final de la reunión y formarán parte del registro oficial. Se puede acceder al documento de Acuerdo del Usuario y Procedimientos para eComment a través de la URL https://www.fresno.gov/cityclerk/ b) Los comentarios electrónicos serán de un máximo de 450 palabras. OR 2. Únase en línea por Zoom a) Si desea hablar sobre un tema del agenda, puede acceder a la reunión de forma remota desde una PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone o dispositivo Android: utilice este enlace https://zoom.us/j/91522881866 b) Si no desea que su nombre aparezca en la pantalla, utilice el menú desplegable y haga clic en "cambiar nombre" para renombrarse. Page 5 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised c) Si desea dirigirse al Consejo de la Ciudad durante la sección de comentarios públicos de la agenda, haga clic en el icono con la etiqueta "Participantes" en la parte inferior central de la pantalla de su PC o Mac. En la parte inferior de la ventana en el lado derecho de la pantalla, haga clic en la parte inferior con la etiqueta "Levantar la Mano". Su mano digital ahora se levantará. d) Aquellos que se dirijan al Consejo deben indicar su nombre para el registro. e) Para facilitar el acceso electrónico, ninguna persona hablará hasta que el Dirigente Oficial lo reconozca. OR 3. Únase por Teléfono a) ÚNASE POR TELÉFONO: 1-669-900-9128 Ingrese la ID de la Reunión: 915 2288 1866 b) Si desea dirigirse al Consejo durante la sección de comentarios públicos del agenda, presione * 9 y lo seleccionaremos en base a la orden durante la reunión. c) El comentario público estará limitado a tres minuto por persona. d) Aquellos que se dirijan al Consejo deben indicar su nombre para el registro. e) Para facilitar el acceso electrónico, ninguna persona hablará hasta que el Dirigente Oficial lo reconozca. OR 4. Correo electrónico: a clerk@fresno.gov a) Los residentes también pueden enviar comentarios por correo electrónico para ser leídos durante la reunión. Incluya la fecha del agenda y el número de artículo sobre el que desea hablar en la línea de asunto de su correo electrónico. b) Los correos electrónicos tendrán un máximo de 450 palabras. c) Todos los comentarios recibidos se distribuirán al Consejo antes y durante la reunión y formarán parte del registro oficial. Page 6 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Todos los participantes estarán en silencio hasta que se les elija, en cuyo punto se desactivara el silenciador. Para evitar que los participantes tengan su video encendido, eliminaremos la opción de mostrar su video. En conformidad con la Orden Ejecutiva, y en conformidad con la Ley de Estadounidenses con Discpacidades, si necesita adaptaciones adicionales, como intérpretes, un signante del lenguaje a señas o los servicios de un traductor, comuníquese con la oficina del Secretario de la Ciudad al (559) 621-7650 o clerk@fresno.gov. Para asegurar disponibilidad, le aconsejamos que haga su petición por lo menos tres días de negocio antes de la reunión. La Ciudad de Fresno le agradece de antemano por tomar todas las precauciones para evitar la propagación del virus COVID-19. LOS ARTICULOS MARCADOS CON TRES ASTERISCOS (***) ESTAN SUJETOS A UN VETO POR PARTE DEL ALCALDE O UNA RECONSIDERACION Page 7 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised COV LUS TSHAJ TAWM RAU COV PEJ XEEM: PEB YUAV TSIS QHIB LUB TSEV SIB THAM RAU COV PAB PAWG TSWJ XYUAS LUB NROOG THIAB LUB TSEV CITY HALL RAU COV PEJ XEEM TUAJ Thaum lub sijhawm uas Cov Lus Khoo Xwm Txheej Ceev Lej 2020-12 tseem ua haujlwm tswj mus, Lub Nroog Fresno yuav tuav cov rooj sib tham rau cov pej xeem hauv istawsnev thiab xovtooj nkaus xwb. Peb yuav tsis muaj neeg tuaj rau tim Lub Tsev Sib Tham Rau Pab Pawg Tswj Xyuas Lub Nroog, thiab peb yuav tsis qhib Lub Tsev Sib Tham Rau Pab Pawg Tswj Xyuas Lub Nroog rau cov pej xeem tuaj. Lub City Hall yuav kaw twj ywm mus tsis pub rau cov pej xeem tuaj. Yog tias koj xav saib lub rooj sib tham hauv Lub Nroog qhov vesxaij nias rau qhov URL https://fresno.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx thiab nias rau qhov sau tias “In progress” hauv qab qhov sau tias "video" kom koj pom tau lub rooj sib tham. Peb yuav tso Pab Pawg Tswj Xyuas Lub Nroog lub rooj lus sib tham tib lub sijhawm lawv tham ntawd thaum 9:00 A.M. ntawm Comcast Tshooj 96 thiab AT&T Tshooj 99. Peb txhawb kom cov pej xeem koom hauv istawsnev. LUS LOS NTAWM COV PEJ XEEM : Peb muaj cov kev ntawm no rau cov pej xeem uas xav hais lus rau Pab Pawg Tswj Xyuas Lub Nroog: 1. Saum eComment ntawm https://fresno.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx. a) Peb yuav qhib eComment lub sijhawm Pab Pawg Tswj Xyuas Lub Nroog tseem tuav lub rooj sib tham thiab peb yuav kaw thaum lub rooj sib tham xaus thiab peb yuav khaws tseg cov lus hauv rau peb cov ntaub ntawv. Koj mus saib tau Cov Lus Pom Zoo thiab Cov Txheej Txheem Rau Tus Neeg Siv eComment ntawm qhov chaw nyob URL https://www.fresno.gov/cityclerk/ b) Peb tsuas pub koj sau 450 cov lus hauv eComments xwb. OR 2. Mus koom hauv istawsnev nrog Zoom a) yog tias koj xav tham txog ib yam ntawm qhov lawv teem los tham txog, koj saib tau lub rooj sib tham qhov twg los tau hauv koj lub PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone, lossis xovtooj Android: Thov siv qhov URL ntawm no https://zoom.us/j/91522881866 Page 8 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised b) Yog tias koj tsis xav kom pom koj lub npe ntawm daim screen rau txhua tus pom, ces nias rau qhov menu kom nws tshwm qhov sau tias "rename" kom koj sau tau ib lub npe rau koj tus kheej. c) Yog tias koj xav hais lus rau Pab Pawg Tswj Xyuas Lub Nroog lub sijhawm lawv qhib rau cov pej xeem hais lus, nias rau qhov sau tias “Participants” uas nyob hauv qab lub nrab ntawm koj daim screen rau lub PC lossis Mac. Hauv qab koj daim screen ntawm sab xis, nias qhov sau tias “Raise Hand”. Thaum koj ua li no nws yuav pom koj tsa koj txhais tes. d) Cov uas hais lus rau Pab Pawg Tswj Xyuas Lub Nroog yuav tsum qhia lawv lub npe rau peb muab ntaus cia. e) Kom peb pab cov tib neeg saum istawsnev, peb yuav tsis pub leej twg hais lus txog txij Tus Tswj Saib Xyuas tso cai tso. OR 3. Koom hauv Xovtooj a) KOOM HAUV XOVTOOJ: 1-669-900-9128 Ntau tus ID rau Lub Rooj Sib Tham: 915 2288 1866 b) Yog tias koj xav hais lus rau Pab Pawg Tswj Xyuas Lub Nroog thaum txog lub sijhawm pub cov pej xeem hais lus, Nias *9 ces peb mam xaiv koj ntawm cov neeg tos hais lus. c) Txhua tus hais lus muaj tsuas peb feeb los hais lus. d) Cov uas hais lus rau Pab Pawg Tswj Xyuas Lub Nroog yuav tsum qhia lawv lub npe rau peb muab ntaus cia. e) Kom peb pab cov tib neeg saum istawsnev, peb yuav tsis pub leej twg hais lus txog txij Tus Tswj Saib Xyuas tso cai tso. OR 4. Email: rau clerk@fresno.gov Page 9 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised a) Cov tib neeg uas nyob hauv lub nroog kuj email tau lawv cov lus tuaj rau peb nyeem thaum peb tuav lub rooj sib tham los tau thiab. Thov sau lub hnub tim ntawm lub rooj sib tham thiab tus lej ntawm qhov koj xav tham txog uas koj xav hais lus rau ntawm kab subject line (kab qhia txog cov ntsiab lus ntawm tsab email) rau koj qhov email. b) Peb tsuas pub koj sau mus txog 450 cov lus rau hauv koj qhov email xwb. c) Tagnrho cov lus yuav muab faib rau Pab Pawg Tswj Xyuas Lub Nroog pom ua ntej thiab thaum lwv tseem tuav lub rooj sib tham thiab peb yuav khaws tseg tagnrho cov lus hais rau peb cov ntaub ntawv. Peb yuav tua kom txhob hnov cov neeg koom lub suab hais txog txij lawv hu nws lub npe ces thaum ntawd mam li taws pub hnov nws hais lus. Kom peb pab tiv thaiv kom tsis txhob pom cov neeg koom, peb yuav tua qhov pom tus neeg. Raws li Cov Lus Khoo Los Ntawm Cov Nom Tswv, thiab kom peb ua tau raws li Txoj Cai Tiv Thaiv Cov Neeg Asmesliskas Uas Muaj Tej Yam Kev Xiam Oob Qhab, Yog tias koj tim-tsum tej kev pab xws li neeg txhais lus, neeg txhais lus piav tes, los sis ib tug neeg txhais ntawv, thov hu rau qhov chaw ua hauj-lwm City Clerk ntawm (559) 621-7650 los sis clerk@fresno.gove. Txhawm rau kom muaj qhov muaj, koj tau hais qhia kom koj thov li tsawg kawg peb hnub cov hnub ua haujlwm ua ntej lub rooj sib tham. Lub Nroog Fresno xav ua tsaug rau koj ua ntej los xyuam xim tiv thaiv kom tus kab mob COVID-19 tsis txhob kis tau ntxiv. YOG QHOV MUAJ PEB LUB HNUB QUB (***) NYOB RAU HAUV DAIM KOM TSWJ YUAV RAUG MAYORAL VETO LOS SIS ROV SOJ NTSUAM DUA Page 10 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised 9:05 A.M. ROLL CALL Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag APPROVE AGENDA CEREMONIAL PRESENTATIONS COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS 1. CONSENT CALENDAR Approval of Minutes for the May 14, 2020 Regular Meeting and May 14, 2020 Special Emergency Closed Session Meeting. ID 20-006201-A Sponsors:Office of the City Clerk Actions related to an Aviation Land and Building Lease and Agreement with Mid-Valley Disposal, LLC.: 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.Approve a Lease between the City of Fresno and Mid-Valley Disposal, LLC., to operate as a Specialized Aviation Service Operator and related aviation operations at Fresno Chandler Executive Airport (Council District 3) ID 20-005981-B Sponsors:Airports Department Actions pertaining to the Animal Control Facility Project: (Council District 4) 1.***RESOLUTION - Declaring an urgent necessity for the preservation of life, health, property and authorizing the award of a construction contract without competitive bidding to Northstar General, Inc. (Subject to Mayor Veto) 2.Award a construction contract with Northstar General Inc., of Fresno, CA, for $14,500,000 3.RESOLUTION - Declaring its official intent to reimburse certain expenditures from proceeds of indebtedness for expenses incurred related to the construction of the Animal Control Facility, in an amount not exceeding $20 million (Requires 5 votes) ID 20-005661-C Page 11 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised 4.***RESOLUTION - the 44th Amendment to Annual Appropriations Resolution No. 2019-133 appropriating $15,029,800 for construction of the new Animal Control Facility Project (Subject to Mayor Veto’s) (Requires 5 votes) 5.Approve Inter-fund Loan Agreement from the Water Enterprise Fund, for the Animal Control Facility Construction, pursuant to Article VI of the City of Fresno Reserve Management Act and Article IV of the Taxpayer Protection Act, providing a cumulative $18,543,000 loan Sponsors:Public Works Department Approve an agreement for consultant services with SWCA Environmental Consultants of San Luis Obispo, California, in the amount of $73,939, for the preparation of environmental studies and technical memos for the Polk Avenue Widening Project (Council District 1). ID 20-005671-D Sponsors:Public Works Department Actions pertaining to Resolution of Intent Number 1137-D to vacate a portion of Mono Street and a portion of the R Street and S Street alley, east of R Street (Council District 3) 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption for Environmental Assessment Number P19-02935 per staffs determination, pursuant to Section 15301/Class 1 and Section 15303/Class 3 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 2.Adopt Resolution of Intent Number 1137-D to vacate a portion of Mono Street and a portion of the R-S alley, east of R Street ID 20-005891-E Sponsors:Public Works Department Actions pertaining to the summary vacation of a portion of North Parkway Drive and a pedestrian easement south of West Weldon Avenue (Council District 3) 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption per staff determination, pursuant to Section 15301(c)/Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Environmental Assessment Number PW12149 ID 20-005901-F Page 12 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised 2.***RESOLUTION - Ordering the summary vacation of a portion of North Parkway Drive and a pedestrian easement south of West Weldon Avenue (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) Sponsors:Public Works Department Approve Contract Change Order No. 1, increasing the contract amount by $119,500, from $197,376 to $316,876 for the Highway Litter Control Contract between the City of Fresno and Landscape Maintenance of America dba California Highway Adoption California Highway Adoption Co. ID 20-006301-G Sponsors:Public Works Department Approve the award of a purchase contract to Ruckstell Sales of Fresno, California, for the purchase of one 520 Peterbilt rear-loading refuse truck in the amount of $304,900 ID 20-005761-H Sponsors:Department of Transportation Approve the award of a purchase contract to Pape Kenworth of Fresno, California, for the purchase of two Kenworth T370 water trucks in the amount of $286,830 ID 20-005781-I Sponsors:Department of Transportation Approve the award of a cooperative purchase agreement to Quinn Company of Fresno, California, for the purchase of one Caterpillar 914M wheel loader in the amount of $146,610 ID 20-005791-J Sponsors:Department of Transportation ***RESOLUTION - Approval and implementation of the Public Transit Agency Safety Plan as required by the Federal Transit Administration (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) ID 20-006001-K Sponsors:Department of Transportation Approve the consultant agreement with Element Markets, a Texas based Limited Liability Company, for the supply of Renewable Natural Gas and Management of Low Carbon Fuel Standard and Renewable Identification Number credits (Proposal No. 9509) ID 20-006011-L Page 13 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Sponsors:Department of Transportation Page 14 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Approve a Second Amendment to the Consultant Services Agreement between the City of Fresno and Quad Knopf, Inc., to prepare an Environmental Impact Report evaluating the proposed regulation and permitting of commercial cannabis activities not to exceed the amount of $300,000. ID 20-006071-M Sponsors:Planning and Development Department Award a Construction Contract to Zim Industries, Inc., in the amount of $442,519 to drill and construct a new production well at Pump Station 28A, located at 505 West Olive Avenue (Bid File 3707) (Council District 3) ID 20-005961-N Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities Approve the First Amendment to the Professional Consultant Services Agreement with Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., to extend the work completion date from November 1, 2019 to June 1, 2020, to provide a condition assessment of capital equipment and components at the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility and Sewer Lift Stations, for a previously approved contract amount of $245,606. (Citywide) ID 20-006021-O Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities Actions pertaining to Water Main Replacement in Congo Alley between Fresno Street and Merced Street (Bid File 3696) (Council District 3): 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption per staff determination, pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) and Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act. 2.Award a construction contract to West Valley Construction Company, Inc., in the amount of $309,670 ID 20-006051-P Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities Actions pertaining to the Police Department’s Axon Body Worn Cameras 1.Award a sole source contract in the amount of $839,900 for the first year and $788,500 per year for the remaining four years, for the maintenance and upgrade of 556 Taser X26P conducted energy weapons (CEW’s, also known as ID 20-005971-Q Page 15 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised “TASERS”), 556 Flex 2 body-worn video cameras, and unlimited video storage through TASER’s Evidence.com storage service. 2.***RESOLUTION - Adopt a Resolution authorizing the establishment of a contract for the purchase and service of body-worn cameras, data storage, and conducted electrical weapons with Axon International, Inc. without advertised competitive bidding (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) Sponsors:Police Department Approval of the 2020 Management Agreement between the City of Fresno and ASM Global for the management of the Fresno Convention and Entertainment Center ID 20-006031-R Sponsors:Office of Mayor & City Manager Approve the reappointment of Kristi Lawrence to the Fresno Mosquito Abatement District. ID 20-006231-S CONTESTED CONSENT CALENDAR 2. SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS 10:00 A.M. #1 WORKSHOP - Parking Financial and Operational Analysis and Parking Authority Feasibility Study ID 20-00496 Sponsors:Planning and Development Department 10:00 A.M. #2 HEARING to adopt Resolutions and Ordinance to Consider the Formation of a Community Facilities District (Community Facilities District No. 17 - Sewer Lift-Station Maintenance District) and Authorize the Levy of a Special Tax (Annadale Commons Development Final Tract Map No. 6187; Assessor’s Parcel Number 479-270-33), near the northwest corner of Annadale and Elm; Final Tract Map No. 5434, northeast corner of Temperance and McKinley Avenues) (Council Districts 3 and 4) 1.***RESOLUTION - of Formation of Community Facilities District No. 17, Authorizing the Levy of a Special ID 20-00591 Page 16 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised Tax, and Preliminarily Establishing an Appropriations Limit (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) 2.***RESOLUTION - Calling Special Mailed-Ballot Election (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) 3.***RESOLUTION - Declaring Election Results (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) 4.***BILL - (For introduction and adoption) - Levying a Special Tax for the Property Tax Year 2019-2020 and Future Tax Years Within and Relating to Community Facilities District No. 17 (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) Sponsors:Public Works Department and Department of Public Utilities 10:10 A.M. Hearing to consider General Plan Text Amendment Application No. P20-01529 and related Environmental Finding which proposes, in the Local Hazard Mitigation section of the Noise and Safety Element of the General Plan, to delete an outdated adoption date of the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex consistent with the requirements of Federal and State law, and General Plan Policy NS-6-a. 1.ADOPT Environmental Assessment No. P20-01529, a finding that the application is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the “common sense” exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15161(b)(3) that there is no possibility that the Plan Amendment Application will have a significant effect on the environment. 2.ADOPT RESOLUTION - Approving the General Plan Text Amendment No. P20-01529 amending the Local Hazard Mitigation section of the Noise and Safety Element of the General Plan, as described in Exhibit A. ID 20-00622 Sponsors:Planning and Development Department Page 17 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised 10:15 A.M. RESOLUTION - Repealing all City Emergency Orders related to COVID-19 ID 20-00628 Sponsors:Councilmember Bredefeld 2:45 P.M. ***Approve the 48th Amendment to Annual Appropriations Resolution No. 2019-133 to Appropriate $1,012,900 for the Purpose of Funding the Transfer of State of California COVID-19 Emergency Homeless Funding to the County of Fresno (Requires 5 Votes) (Subject to Mayor’s veto) ID 20-00645 Sponsors:Finance Department 3. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION ***RESOLUTION - Adopting the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Including Citizen Participation Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice; authorizing submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for application of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) Programs and authorizing the City Manager to sign all implementing documents required by HUD (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) ID 20-004873-A Sponsors:Planning and Development Department BILL - (For Introduction) Adding California Building Code Title 24 Appendix 0104 To Section 11-102 of the Fresno Municipal Code relating to Amendments to the California Building Code regarding Emergency Sleeping Cabins. ID 20-006413-B Sponsors:Planning and Development Department 4. CITY COUNCIL 5. CLOSED SESSION Page 18 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised PLEASE NOTE: UNSCHEDULED COMMUNICATION IS NOT SCHEDULED FOR A SPECIFIC TIME AND MAY BE HEARD ANY TIME DURING THE MEETING UNSCHEDULED COMMUNICATION Members of the public may address the Council regarding items that are not listed on the agenda and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council. Each person is limited to a three (3) minute presentation. Anyone wishing to be placed on an agenda for a specified topic should contact the City Clerk’s Office at least ten (10) days prior to the desired date. Council action on unscheduled items, if any, shall be limited to referring the item to staff for a report and possible scheduling on a future Council agenda. ADJOURNMENT UPCOMING SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS June 18, 2020 10:00 A.M. #1 - HEARING to adopt resolutions and ordinance to annex territory and levy a special tax regarding City of Fresno Community Facilities District No. 11, Annexation No. 109 (Final Tract Map No. 6198) (northwest corner of West Shaw and North Grantland Avenues) (Council District 2) June 18, 2020 10:00 A.M. #2 - HEARING to consider the proposed Annual Assessment for the City of Fresno Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 (Citywide) July 16, 2020 10:00 A.M. #1 - HEARING to adopt resolutions and ordinance to annex territory and levy a special tax regarding City of Fresno Community Facilities District No. 11, Annexation No. 110 (Final Parcel Map No. 2018-04; Parcels A to D, and the Remainder Parcel) (north side of West Providence Avenue between North Cornelia and Lodi Avenues) (Council District 3) July 16, 2020 10:00 A.M. #2 - HEARING to adopt resolutions and ordinance to annex territory and levy a special tax regarding City of Fresno Community Facilities District No. 9, Annexation No. 35 (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 504-092-34S, 504-092-38S, and 504-092-42S (El Paseo Phase II Development) (southwest side of North Riverside Drive, south of West Herndon Avenue) (Council District 2) UPCOMING EMPLOYEE CEREMONIES Page 19 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto May 21, 2020City Council Meeting Agenda - Final-revised July 22, 2020 (Wednesday - 2:00 P.M.) - Employee of the Summer Quarter - CANCELLED October 21, 2020 (Wednesday - 2:00 P.M.) - Employee of the Fall Quarter November 18, 2020 (Wednesday - 2:00 P.M.) – Employee Service Awards 2020 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE MAY 28, 2020 - NO MEETING JUNE 4, 2020 - NO MEETING JUNE 11, 2020 - 9:00 A.M. MEETING JUNE 18, 2020 - 9:00 A.M. MEETING JUNE 25, 2020 - 9:00 A.M. MEETING JULY 2, 2020 - NO MEETING JULY 9, 2020 - NO MEETING JULY 16, 2020 - 9:00 A.M. MEETING JULY 23, 2020 - NO MEETING JULY 30, 2020 - NO MEETING AUGUST 6, 2020 - NO MEETING AUGUST 13, 2020 - NO MEETING AUGUST 20, 2020 - 9:00 A.M. MEETING AUGUST 27, 2020 - 9:00 A.M. MEETING Page 20 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00620 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-A REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 SUBJECT Approval of Minutes for the May 14, 2020 Regular Meeting and May 14, 2020 Special Emergency Closed Session Meeting. City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ Thursday, May 14, 2020 9:00 AM City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov Council Chambers City Council President - Miguel Angel Arias Vice President - Paul Caprioglio Councilmembers: Esmeralda Z. Soria, Mike Karbassi, Luis Chavez, Garry Bredefeld, Nelson Esparza City Manager - Wilma Quan City Attorney - Douglas T. Sloan City Clerk - Yvonne Spence, MMC Meeting Minutes - Draft Special Emergency Closed Session May 14, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft City Council met in special emergency closed session, City Hall on the date and time written above. 9:12 A.M. ROLL CALL President Miguel Angel Arias Vice President Paul Caprioglio Councilmember Esmeralda Z. Soria Councilmember Mike Karbassi Councilmember Luis Chavez Councilmember Garry Bredefeld Councilmember Nelson Esparza Present:7 - APPROVE AGENDA On motion of Councilmember Esparza, seconded by Councilmember Bredefeld,the above Action was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Arias, Caprioglio, Soria, Karbassi, Chavez, Bredefeld and Esparza 7 - Closed Session Upon call, there was no public comment. City Council recessed into Closed Session at 9:17 A.M. and returned from Closed Session at 10:35 A.M. There was no announcements after Closed Session and the above item was discussed. ID 20-00627 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - PUBLIC SECURITY - Government Code Section 54957(a): Matters posing a threat to the security of public buildings, the security of essential public services, and to the public's right of access to public services and public facilities, and related actions pertaining to the Declaration by Governor Newsom of a State of Emergency to Help State Prepare for Broader Spread of COVID-19, and related Iocal concerns. ADJOURNMENT City Council adjourned the Special Emergency Closed Session meeting at City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 2 May 14, 2020City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft 10:35 A.M. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 3 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00598 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-B REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:KEVIN R. MEIKLE, Director of Aviation Airports Department SUBJECT Actions related to an Aviation Land and Building Lease and Agreement with Mid-Valley Disposal, LLC.: 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities)of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.Approve a Lease between the City of Fresno and Mid-Valley Disposal,LLC.,to operate as a Specialized Aviation Service Operator and related aviation operations at Fresno Chandler Executive Airport (Council District 3) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption,pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines,and authorize the Director of Aviation to execute an Aviation Land and Building Lease and Agreement (Lease)with Mid-Valley Disposal, LLC.,(Mid-Valley),to operate as a Specialized Aviation Service Operator (SASO)and related aviation operations at Fresno Chandler Executive Airport (FCH). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Mid-Valley is interested in leasing 648 W.Kearney Boulevard (Leasehold),located at FCH,to store corporate aircraft.The Leasehold consists of 37,527 square feet of office,hangar,and ramp space. The term of the proposed Lease is for five years and includes two five-year options,with a 30-day written termination notice without cause. BACKGROUND As a SASO and in addition to storing corporate aircraft,Mid-Valley would also be able to engage in other Revenue Generating Aviation Activities,including but not limited to the following:any commercial activity which relates to the fabrication,operation,maintenance,modification,repair, cleaning [exterior and/or interior],refurbishing,restoration,overhaul,painting,plating or refinishing of aircraft;demonstration flights;aircraft rental;sightseeing flights;aircraft sales,including fractional ownership;management of aircraft owned by others;and/or the sale and/or delivery or installation City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00598 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-B ownership;management of aircraft owned by others;and/or the sale and/or delivery or installation of aircraft components, parts, systems or accessories. The 37,527 square foot leasehold includes a 10,000 square foot hangar,23,911 paved aircraft parking apron,and 3,616 other paved area.Refer to attached Site Plan.Mid-Valley will also perform various improvements to the leasehold including restroom upgrades per the Americans with Disabilities Act. The City Attorney has approved the Lease and Agreement as to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Staff has determined this project falls within the Class 1 Categorical Exemptions set forth in the Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines for Existing Facilities,as it involves the use of existing structures in place at Fresno Chandler Executive Airport,with no changes to usage.Furthermore, staff has determined none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15300.2 apply to this project. LOCAL PREFERENCE The City's Local Preference Ordinance was not applied because this Lease does not include a bid or award of a construction or services contract. FISCAL IMPACT The first year rent is $23,400.The estimated revenue generated under the Lease for the initial five- year term will be $117,000 and include provisions for annual Consumer Price Index adjustments.All revenue will be deposited into the Airports Enterprise Fund and will contribute to the operation and maintenance of FCH. There is no impact to the General Fund from this action. Attachments: Aviation Land and Building Lease and Agreement Site Plan City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00566 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-C REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department THROUGH:WILLIAM C. HERR, Assistant Director Public Works Department, Facilities and Construction Management Divisions BY:L. NATHAN SANCHEZ, Supervising Engineering Technician Public Works Department, Facilities Division SUBJECT Actions pertaining to the Animal Control Facility Project: (Council District 4) 1.***RESOLUTION -Declaring an urgent necessity for the preservation of life,health,property and authorizing the award of a construction contract without competitive bidding to Northstar General, Inc. (Subject to Mayor Veto) 2.Award a construction contract with Northstar General Inc., of Fresno, CA, for $14,500,000 3.RESOLUTION -Declaring its official intent to reimburse certain expenditures from proceeds of indebtedness for expenses incurred related to the construction of the Animal Control Facility, in an amount not exceeding $20 million (Requires 5 votes) 4.***RESOLUTION -the 44th Amendment to Annual Appropriations Resolution No.2019-133 appropriating $15,029,800 for construction of the new Animal Control Facility Project (Subject to Mayor Veto’s) (Requires 5 votes) 5.Approve Inter-fund Loan Agreement from the Water Enterprise Fund,for the Animal Control Facility Construction,pursuant to Article VI of the City of Fresno Reserve Management Act and Article IV of the Taxpayer Protection Act, providing a cumulative $18,543,000 loan RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that City Council take the following actions: 1.ADOPT a finding of urgent necessity for the award of the construction contract without competitive bidding. 2.AWARD a construction contract with Northstar General Inc.for $14,500,000 for the Animal Control Facility project and authorize the Public Works Director or designee to sign and execute the standardized contract on behalf of the City of Fresno. City of Fresno Printed on 11/8/2022Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00566 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-C 3.ADOPT a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Fresno declaring its official intent to reimburse certain expenditures from proceeds of indebtedness for expenses incurred related to the construction of the Animal Control Facility, in an amount not exceeding $20 million. 4.Adopt the 44th Amendment to Annual Appropriations Resolution No.2019-133 appropriating $15,029,800 for construction of the new Animal Control Facility Project 5.APPROVE the Inter-fund Loan Agreement from the Water Enterprise Fund,for the Animal Control Facility Construction,pursuant to Article VI of the City of Fresno Reserve Management Act and Article IV of the Taxpayer Protection Act, providing a cumulative $18,543,000 loan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Fresno has an urgent need to build a new animal control facility to serve the needs of the community.On June 20,2019,the Council approved a Third Amendment to the Agreement entered between the City of Fresno and the Central California Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (CCSPCA),which included a one-year extension of services through June 30,2020.The CCSPCA has verbally indicated their desire to discontinue services to the City as they transition to a new business model,thus driving the need to design and construct a City-owned animal control facility. Council approved a consultant services agreement for the first part of the design-build process on January 16,2020,with Northstar General,Inc.,including subconsultants IT Architecture and Lore Engineering,to develop the architectural and engineering drawings for the new complex of buildings. Staff negotiated and has come to an agreement with Northstar General Inc.for the second part of the design-build process,which will construct the complex of buildings totaling approximately 34,500 square feet including site improvements.Time is of the essence to award the construction contract, as it is necessary to take these actions now so that the City could have a new facility ready to operate by July 2021. BACKGROUND The CCSPCA has provided all animal control,pound master,veterinary,and animal sheltering services to the City of Fresno for several decades.However,the CCSPCA has indicated their intentions to discontinue services,thus creating a need for the City to expeditiously design and construct its own animal control facility.A traditional design-bid-build process would result in a new facility opening in June 2022,much too late given the current situation and the need to provide these essential services.Therefore Council approved the progressive design-build approach on January 16,2020,where Northstar General Inc.,with IT Architecture and Lore Engineering,was authorized to provide consultant services to developed construction drawings with guidance from City staff.The award of the construction contract will fulfill the second part of the design-build process with Northstar General Inc., so that the City could have a new facility ready to operate by July 2021. The new Animal Control Facility will be located on the 5.1 acre property acquired from The Gap,Inc., in February 2020,with an address of 5277 E.Airways Blvd,Fresno,CA 93727.The facility will contain five buildings,ranging in sizes from approximately 3,800 to 13,250 sq.ft.The five buildings in the complex will consist of a main building for the administrative,operational,and customer service uses;a second building that will house the veterinarian services and isolation rooms for injured and recovering animals; and the remaining three buildings will provide animal housing. City of Fresno Printed on 11/8/2022Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00566 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-C The new facility will allow for the annual intake of approximately 10,000-15,000 animals,with about 8,000-12,000 of those being dogs and 1,000-3,000 being cats.Staff worked with experts in the field to ensure the new facility will be meet the needs of the City of Fresno residents and allow for the humane care and treatment of all animals while they are in the City’s animal shelter.The facility will provide an adequate number of kennels and play yards for the animals,while also providing adequate space for personnel to intake animals and process adoptions.Additionally,the facility will include a medical suite for veterinarian services,including but not limited to,emergency care for injured animals, spay and neuter surgeries, and the delivery of vaccinations. All five buildings will be constructed so that solar panels can easily be installed and incorporated into the electrical system.The Animal Shelter Project is being developed with a planned on-site solar component to offset the facility’s energy with renewable power.The solar project will be a combination of rooftop solar and solar shade structures that will be sized to offset up to 100%of its expected energy needs.Staff is finalizing agreements with a vendor that has extensive experience developing projects of similar scope within Fresno County and throughout the state with other Public Agencies.This vendor has been working with the City of Fresno on additional solar opportunities and was vetted and selected by a Joint Powers Authority through a statewide piggyback RFP for solar + storage.The solar project will require zero capital outlay from the City and the contract will include favorable terms and conditions,including flat energy rates for the life of the project,City ownership of the project’s renewable energy certificates (RECs),operations/maintenance included for the life of the project, to include an annual performance guarantee. The Inter-fund Loan Agreement between the Water Enterprise Fund and the City of Fresno Animal Control Facility Fund,for the Animal Control Facility Construction,will provide a cumulative $18,543,100 loan for the term of five years.The proposed amendment to the annual appropriations resolution will provide the necessary appropriations or spending authority for the FY2020 project costs,including the architectural and engineering design,surveying,geotechnical investigations, project management and construction contract.The proposed FY2021 City budget will include appropriations for the construction management,inspections,material testing,PG&E new service connections, construction contingencies, fleet vehicles and equipment purchases. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS The project has been previously assessed under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)and found to be exempt under Section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented but, Northstar General Inc., is a local business. FISCAL IMPACT All project costs will be paid for by appropriations from the Animal Control Facility fund.The reimbursement resolution will allow for these expenditures to be financed through bond proceeds. Ongoing operational expenses for the facility will be included in City budgets for FY2022 and beyond, in a similar manner as the historical budgetary approach with the CCSPCA contractual expenses. City of Fresno Printed on 11/8/2022Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00566 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-C Attachments: Construction Contract Resolution - Urgent Necessity Resolution - Intent to Reimbursement Expenditures Annual Appropriations Resolution Inter-fund Loan Agreement Presentation City of Fresno Printed on 11/8/2022Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ RESOLUTION NO . ------ A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCI L OF THE CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE OFFICIAL INTENT OF THE CITY OF FRESNO TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES FROM PROCEEDS OF INDEBTEDNESS WHEREAS, the City of Fresno (City) intends to begin or continue preconstruction/construction of certain buildings and purchase certain equipment for the establishment of a City Animal Shelter as descr ibed in that certain Consultant Services Agreement approved by Council on January 16, 2020, and further described at the hearing regarding actions pertaining to the City Animal Shelter held by Council on February 13, 2020, and in the documents presented and/or approved at said hearing, incorporated herein (Project); and WHEREAS, the City expects to pay certain preliminary and original expenditures in connection with these Projects before issuance of indebtedness for the purpose of financing costs associated with the Project before issuance of indebtedness for the purpose of financing costs associated with the Project on a long term basis (Reimbursement Expenditures); and WHEREAS, the City reasonably expects that debt obligations in an amount not to exceed$ 20 million will be issued, and that certain proceeds thereof will be used to reimburse the Reimbursement Expen�itures; and WHEREAS, Section 1.150-2 of the Tre�sury Regulations· requires the City to declare its reasooable official intent to reimburse prior expenditur�� for the Project with � . ·,. proceeds of the subsequent borrowing. 1 of 3 Date Adopted: Date Approved: Effective Date: City Attorney Approval: Resolution No. .. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Fresno as follows: 1.It finds and determines that the foregoing recitals are true and correct. 2.This resolution is made solely to establish compliance with the requirements of Section 1150-2 of the Treasury Regulations. This resolution does not bind the City to make any expenditures, to incur any indebtedness, or to proceed with the Project. 3.The Council hereby declares the City's official intent to use proceeds of indebtedness to reimburse itself for Reimbursement Expenditures. 4.This resolution shall take effect upon its adoption. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2 of 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF FRESNO ) ss. CITY OF FRESNO ) I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, at a regular meeting held on the day of 2020. AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN APPROVED AS TO FORM: DOUGLAS T. SLOAN City Attorney By:------------Raj Singh Badhesha Date Senior Deputy City Attorney YVONNE SPENCE, MMC CRM City Clerk By:-----------Deputy Date 3 of 3 Date Adopted: 1 of 3 Date Approved: Effective Date: Resolution No. RESOLUTION NO. ___________ A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO ADOPTING THE 44th AMENDMENT TO THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION RESOLUTION NO. 2019-133 APPROPRIATING $15,029,800 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW ANIMAL SHELTER PROJECT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO: THAT PART III of the Annual Appropriation Resolution No. 2019-133 be and is hereby amended as follows: Increase/(Decrease) TO: OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT Animal Shelter $ 15,029,800 THAT account titles and numbers requiring adjustment by this Resolution are as follows: Animal Shelter Revenues: Account: 43910 Transfers From Other Fund $ 18,543,100 Fund: 30160 Org Unit: 109901 Total Revenues $ 18,543,100 2 of 3 Increase/(Decrease) Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 54,500 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 22,500 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 267,700 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 7,600 55501 Printing & Binding—O/S Vendor 3,700 56106 Postage 300 57507 Contract Construction 14,500,000 58026 Capital Project Permits & Fees 120,400 59102 City Attorney Charges 6,400 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 8,400 59116 Equipment Usage 6,400 59117 Overhead 31,900 Fund: 30160 Org Unit: 109901 Project: PW00935 Total Appropriations $ 15,029,800 Water Enterprise Retained Earnings: Account: 25300 Unreserved/Undesignated $ 18,543,100 Fund: 40101 Org Unit: 411001 Total Retained Earnings $ 18,543,100 Revenues: Account: 44910 Transfer To Other Fund $(18,543,100) Fund: 40101 Org Unit: 411008 Total Revenues $ (18,543,100) THAT the purpose is to appropriate $15,029,800 for construction of the new Animal Shelter, which is comprised of an $18,543,100 inter-fund loan from the Water Enterprise fund. The remaining inter-fund loan appropriations totaling $3,513,300 are budgeted in FY 2021 and FY 2022 to complete construction of the facility. 3 of 3 CLERK’S CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA} COUNTY OF FRESNO } ss. CITY OF FRESNO } I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, California, at a regular meeting thereof, held on the Day of , 2020 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor Approval: , 2020 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2020 Mayor Veto: , 2020 Council Override Veto: , 2020 YVONNE SPENCE, MMC City Clerk BY: ____________________________ Deputy INTERFUND LOAN AGREEMENT This Loan Agreement (Agreement) is executed as of ______________, 2020 (Effective Date), between the City of Fresno Water Enterprise Fund (Lender) and the City of Fresno Animal Shelter Construction Fund (Borrower). Lender agrees to lend to Borrower, and Borrower agrees to repay Lender, an amount not to exceed the Principal Amount and interest accrued on the unpaid loan balance, in accordance with the following: 1. Purpose of the Loan: To provide funds for use by the Borrower or its designee to provide funding for the design and construction of an animal shelter. 2. Principal Loan Amount: Not to exceed $18,543,000. The loan will be recorded as receivable to the Lender and payable to the Borrower. 3. Term of the Loan: The term of this loan shall be five years, beginning on the Effective Date, and shall be repaid in full as of ___________, 2025. 4. Scheduled Payments. Borrower shall make payments annually against principal and interest. The first payment shall commence on the date that is one year from the Effective Date of this Agreement. At a minimum, each annual scheduled payment shall equal the amount of any accrued interest through the date of payment, plus a principal payment equal to one-fifth (1/5) of the original principal amount. Payments will be credited first to interest then due, and then to principal. Borrower may make partial or complete payment of principal and earned interest at any time before its due date and without any prepayment penalty. 5. Rate of Interest. Interest shall accrue at a rate equal to the City’s Pooled Investment Rate, fixed monthly, calculated and accrued in the same manner that the City would otherwise earn interest on the funds if deposited and earning interest as a pooled investment. The City’s Pooled Investment Rate effective on the date of this Note is 2.0417%. Loan interest will be recorded as revenue to the Lender and expenditure to the Borrower. 6. General Provisions. This Agreement constitutes the full Agreement by and between the parties and no other representations have been made regarding the contents of this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be amended, modified, or altered in any respect unless such amendment, modification, or alteration has been reduced to writing and executed by both parties. LENDER BORROWER Wilma Quan, City Manager Wilma Quan, City Manager City of Fresno City of Fresno City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00567 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-D REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department THROUGH:RANDALL W. MORRISON, PE, Assistant Director Public Works Department, Engineering Division BY:JOHN HONEY, PE, Professional Engineer Public Works Department, Engineering Division, Project Management SUBJECT Approve an agreement for consultant services with SWCA Environmental Consultants of San Luis Obispo,California,in the amount of $73,939,for the preparation of environmental studies and technical memos for the Polk Avenue Widening Project (Council District 1). RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the City Council approve an agreement for consultant services with SWCA Environmental Consultants,in the amount of $73,939,for the preparation of environmental studies and technical memos for the Polk Avenue Widening Project and authorize the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute the agreement on behalf of the City of Fresno. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Fresno seeks to construct street improvements and widen the west side of Polk Avenue from Shaw Avenue to Gettysburg Avenue,including curbs,gutters and sidewalks.The preliminary engineering is funded with New Growth Area Major Street impact fees and construction funding has been secured through a grant through the Federal Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) program administered through Caltrans.Since the project includes federal funding,a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)determination is required prior to commencing right-of-way acquisition and construction.Staff recommends approval of the agreement for environmental studies and technical memos required for a NEPA determination.Staff recommends approval of the agreement with SWCA Environmental Consultants,in the amount of $73,939,for the preparation of environmental studies and technical memos for the Polk Avenue Widening Project. City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00567 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-D BACKGROUND Polk Avenue currently exists as a two-lane roadway lacking curbs,gutters,sidewalks and drainage facilities south of Shaw Avenue.Bottlenecks exist between the newer,fully improved,subdivisions and older areas that were previously developed in the County.In accordance with the 2035 General Plan,Polk Avenue is planned to be a four-lane divided arterial between Shaw Avenue and Gettysburg Avenue. The design and preparation of street improvement plans,specifications and engineer’s estimate for the project is currently being completed by Blair,Church &Flynn per a consulting agreement, approved by City Council on April 6,2017 and executed on April 25,2017.New Growth Area Major Street Impact fees are being used to fund the preliminary engineering costs. The City of Fresno was awarded a Federal STBG grant that provides construction funding for the Polk Avenue widening.These construction funds will be used to widen the west side of Polk Avenue between Shaw Avenue and Gettysburg Avenue per the alignment established by Directors Determination 15-C-5374,and consistent with the Shaw Avenue Official Plan Line as adopted by the Council.Construction will result in two southbound travel lanes,bike lanes,curbs,gutters and sidewalks on the west side of the street,while retaining one northbound travel lane.A HAWK pedestrian signal near Teague Elementary School,is also included with the Project.The Federal STBG program application was part of a package of grants authorized per Resolution No.2017-288 by the City Council on October 19, 2017. As a result of Federal STBG program funding requirements,additional environmental studies and technical memos are required to satisfy NEPA,prior to starting right-of-way acquisition.Nine parcels have been identified for right-of-way acquisition to widen the west side of Polk Avenue between Shaw Avenue and Acacia Avenue.The acquisition process cannot begin until the environmental studies are completed and approved by Caltrans. In October 2019,the City posted a Request for Qualifications (RFQ)for the environmental phase of the project to include preparation of environmental studies and technical memos.In accordance with Administrative Order (A.O.)6-19,staff sent out the RFQ via the City’s website and advertised in the Business Journal.The RFQ was posted for two weeks.Three statements of qualifications were received and staff interviewed all three qualified respondents in October 2019.SWCA Environmental Consultants was determined to be the most qualified and provided submitted an acceptable proposal for the preparation of environmental studies and technical memos. Staff is requesting City Council approve an agreement with SWCA Environmental Consultants of San Luis Obispo,California in the amount $73,939 for the preparation of environmental studies and technical memos for the Polk Avenue Widening Project,and to authorize the Public Works Director, or designee,to sign and execute the agreement,approved as to form by the City Attorney’s Office,on behalf of the City. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)guidelines,this item is not a project for the purposes of CEQA. City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00567 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-D LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented because no local firms submitted a statement of qualifications. FISCAL IMPACT The project is located in Council District 1.The project will have no impact to the General Fund.This agreement will be paid by New Growth Area Major Street Impact fees that are included in the project budget as adopted in the current fiscal year City Budget. Attachments: Vicinity Map Consultant Agreement City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Whites Bridge MapleBrawleyHerndon Bullard Shaw ClovisFowlerTemperanceWestPalmClovisFowlerTemperanceDe WolfShields McKinley Belmont ChestnutPeachAmerican CedarGrantlandHayesElmEastMarksWestWalnutCorneliaNorth California Jensen Ashlan GrantlandHayesCorneliaBrawleyMarksShaw Bullard Herndon Nees De WolfShields McKinley Belmont California Jensen North Kings Canyon AshlanPeachBehymer Copper Shepherd NeesBlackstoneFirstCedarChestnutGarfieldBryanPolkBlytheValentineVan NessFruitMaroaFresnoMillbrookMapleWillowDakota Clinton Olive Gettysburg Barstow Sierra Alluvial Nielsen Kearney Muscat Annadale Church WillowMinnewawaMalaga OrangeBryanSunnysideArmstrongLocanFigCherryHughesFruitPolkValentineBlytheAlluvial Sierra Barstow Perrin SunnysideArmstrongLocanClinton Olive Tulare Butler Church Annadale DakotaMinnewawaInternational Teague Polk Avenue WIdening Project N 01.530.75 Miles DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS VICINITY MAP Project ID: PW00796 Council District: 1 Polk Avenue Widening Project DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 -1- AGREEMENT CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA CONSULTANT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into effective the day of May, 2020, by and between the CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY"), and SWCA Environmental Consultant, a California Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT"). RECITALS WHEREAS, CITY desires to obtain professional engineering services for the Polk Avenue Widening Project, hereinafter referred to as the “Project;” and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is engaged in the business of furnishing services as a Environmental Consultant and hereby represents that it desires to and is professionally and legally capable of performing the services called for by this Agreement; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT acknowledges that this Agreement is subject to the requirements of Fresno Municipal Code Section 4-107 and Administrative Order No. 6-19; and WHEREAS, this Agreement will be administered for CITY by its Public Works Director (hereinafter referred to as "Director") or his/her designee. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the covenants, conditions, and promises hereinafter contained to be kept and performed by the respective parties, it is mutually agreed as follows: 1. Scope of Services. CONSULTANT shall perform to the satisfaction of CITY the services described in Exhibit A, including all work incidental to, or necessary to perform, such services even though not specifically described in Exhibit A. 2. Term of Agreement and Time for Performance. This Agreement shall be effective from the date first set forth above and shall continue in full force and effect through the earlier of complete rendition of the services hereunder or June 30, 2021, subject to any earlier termination in accordance with this Agreement. The services of CONSULTANT as described in Exhibit A are to commence upon CITY’S issuance of a written “Notice to Proceed.” Work shall be undertaken and completed in a sequence assuring expeditious completion, but in any event, all such services shall be completed within four hundred twelve (412) consecutive calendar days from such authorization to proceed. 3. Compensation. (a) CONSULTANT’S sole compensation for satisfactory performance of all services required or rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be a total fee of Seventy Three Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty Nine Dollars ($73,939). Such fee includes all expenses incurred by CONSULTANT in performance of the services. (b) Detailed statements shall be rendered monthly and will be payable in the normal course of CITY business. DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 -2- (c) The parties may modify this Agreement to increase or decrease the scope of services or provide for the rendition of services not required by this Agreement, which modification shall include an adjustment to CONSULTANT’S compensation. Any change in the scope of services must be made by written amendment to the Agreement signed by an authorized representative for each party. CONSULTANT shall not be entitled to any additional compensation if services are performed prior to a signed written amendment. 4. Termination, Remedies and Force Majeure. (a) This Agreement shall terminate without any liability of CITY to CONSULTANT upon the earlier of: (i) CONSULTANT’S filing for protection under the federal bankruptcy laws, or any bankruptcy petition or petition for receiver commenced by a third party against CONSULTANT; (ii) 7 calendar days prior written notice with or without cause by CITY to CONSULTANT; (iii) CITY’S non-appropriation of funds sufficient to meet its obligations hereunder during any CITY fiscal year of this Agreement, or insufficient funding for the Project; or (iv) expiration of this Agreement. (b) Immediately upon any termination or expiration of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall (i) immediately stop all work hereunder; (ii) immediately cause any and all of its subcontractors to cease work; and (iii) return to CITY any and all unearned payments and all properties and materials in the possession of CONSULTANT that are owned by CITY. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall be paid compensation for services satisfactorily performed prior to the effective date of termination. CONSULTANT shall not be paid for any work or services performed or costs incurred which reasonably could have been avoided. (c) In the event of termination due to failure of CONSULTANT to satisfactorily perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, CITY may withhold an amount that would otherwise be payable as an offset to, but not in excess of, CITY’S damages caused by such failure. In no event shall any payment by CITY pursuant to this Agreement constitute a waiver by CITY of any breach of this Agreement which may then exist on the part of CONSULTANT, nor shall such payment impair or prejudice any remedy available to CITY with respect to the breach. (d) Upon any breach of this Agreement by CONSULTANT, CITY may (i) exercise any right, remedy (in contract, law or equity), or privilege which may be available to it under applicable laws of the State of California or any other applicable law; (ii) proceed by appropriate court action to enforce the terms of the Agreement; and/or (iii) recover all direct, indirect, consequential, economic and incidental damages for the breach of the Agreement. If it is determined that CITY improperly terminated this Agreement for default, such termination shall be deemed a termination for convenience. (e) CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with adequate written assurances of future performance, upon Director’s request, in the event CONSULTANT fails to comply with any terms or conditions of this Agreement. (f) CONSULTANT shall be liable for default unless nonperformance is caused by an occurrence beyond the reasonable control of CONSULTANT and without its fault or negligence such as, acts of God or the public enemy, acts of CITY in its contractual capacity, fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, unusually severe weather, and delays of common carriers. CONSULTANT shall notify Director in writing as soon as it is reasonably possible after the commencement of any excusable delay, setting forth the full particulars in DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 -3- connection therewith, and shall remedy such occurrence with all reasonable dispatch, and shall promptly give written notice to Director of the cessation of such occurrence. 5. Confidential Information, Ownership of Documents and Copyright License. (a) Any reports, information, or other data prepared or assembled by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement shall not be made available to any individual or organization by CONSULTANT without the prior written approval of CITY. During the term of this Agreement, and thereafter, CONSULTANT shall not, without the prior written consent of CITY, disclose to anyone any Confidential Information. The term Confidential Information for the purposes of this Agreement shall include all proprietary and confidential information of CITY, including but not limited to business plans, marketing plans, financial information, designs, drawings, specifications, materials, compilations, documents, instruments, models, source or object codes and other information disclosed or submitted, orally, in writing, or by any other medium or media. All Confidential Information shall be and remain confidential and proprietary in CITY. (b) Any and all original sketches, pencil tracings of working drawings, plans, computations, specifications, computer disk files, writings and other documents prepared or provided by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement are the property of CITY at the time of preparation and shall be turned over to CITY upon expiration or termination of the Agreement or default by CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT grants CITY a copyright license to use such drawings and writings. CONSULTANT shall not permit the reproduction or use thereof by any other person except as otherwise expressly provided herein. CITY may modify the design including any drawings or writings. Any use by CITY of the aforesaid sketches, tracings, plans, computations, specifications, computer disk files, writings and other documents in completed form as to other projects or extensions of this Project, or in uncompleted form, without specific written verification by CONSULTANT will be at CITY’S sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT may keep a copy of all drawings and specifications for its sole and exclusive use. (c) If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall cause each subcontractor to also comply with the requirements of this Section 5. (d) This Section 5 shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. 6. Professional Skill. It is further mutually understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that inasmuch as CONSULTANT represents to CITY that CONSULTANT and its subcontractors, if any, are skilled in the profession and shall perform in accordance with the standards of said profession necessary to perform the services agreed to be done by it under this Agreement, CITY relies upon the skill of CONSULTANT and any subcontractors to do and perform such services in a skillful manner and CONSULTANT agrees to thus perform the services and require the same of any subcontractors. Therefore, any acceptance of such services by CITY shall not operate as a release of CONSULTANT or any subcontractors from said professional standards. 7. Indemnification. To the furthest extent allowed by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers from any and all loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs and damages (whether in contract, tort or strict liability, including but not limited to personal injury, death at any DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 -4- time and property damage), and from any and all claims, demands and actions in law or equity (including reasonable attorney's fees and litigation expenses) that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, its principals, officers, employees, agents or volunteers in the performance of this Agreement. If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall require each subcontractor to indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers in accordance with the terms of the preceding paragraph. This section shall survive termination or expiration of this Agreement. 8. Insurance. (a) Throughout the life of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall pay for and maintain in full force and effect all insurance as required in Exhibit B, which is incorporated into and part of this Agreement, with an insurance company(ies) either (i) admitted by the California Insurance Commissioner to do business in the State of California and rated no less than “A-VII” in the Best’s Insurance Rating Guide, or (ii) as may be authorized in writing by CITY'S Risk Manager or his/her designee at any time and in his/her sole discretion. The required policies of insurance as stated in Exhibit B shall maintain limits of liability of not less than those amounts stated therein. However, the insurance limits available to CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers as additional insureds, shall be the greater of the minimum limits specified therein or the full limit of any insurance proceeds to the named insured. (b) If at any time during the life of the Agreement or any extension, CONSULTANT or any of its subcontractors/sub-consultants fail to maintain any required insurance in full force and effect, all services and work under this Agreement shall be discontinued immediately, and all payments due or that become due to CONSULTANT shall be withheld until notice is received by CITY that the required insurance has been restored to full force and effect and that the premiums therefore have been paid for a period satisfactory to CITY. Any failure to maintain the required insurance shall be sufficient cause for CITY to terminate this Agreement. No action taken by CITY pursuant to this section shall in any way relieve CONSULTANT of its responsibilities under this Agreement. The phrase “fail to maintain any required insurance” shall include, without limitation, notification received by CITY that an insurer has commenced proceedings, or has had proceedings commenced against it, indicating that the insurer is insolvent. (c) The fact that insurance is obtained by CONSULTANT shall not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of CONSULTANT, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this Agreement. The duty to indemnify CITY shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by CONSULTANT. Approval or purchase of any insurance contracts or policies shall in no way relieve from liability nor limit the liability of CONSULTANT, its principals, officers, agents, employees, persons under the supervision of CONSULTANT, vendors, suppliers, invitees, consultants, sub-consultants, subcontractors, or anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them. (d) If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall require each subcontractor/sub-consultant to provide insurance protection, as an additional insured, to the CITY and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers in accordance with the terms of this section, except that any required certificates and applicable endorsements shall be on file with CONSULTANT DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 -5- and CITY prior to the commencement of any services by the subcontractor. CONSULTANT and any subcontractor/sub-consultant shall establish additional insured status for CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers by using Insurance Service Office (ISO) Form CG 20 10 11 85 or both CG 20 10 10 01 and CG 20 37 10 01 or by an executed manuscript company endorsement providing additional insured status as broad as that contained in ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85. 9. Conflict of Interest and Non-Solicitation. (a) Prior to CITY’S execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall complete a City of Fresno conflict of interest disclosure statement in the form as set forth in Exhibit C. During the term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall have the obligation and duty to immediately notify CITY in writing of any change to the information provided by CONSULTANT in such statement. (b) CONSULTANT shall comply, and require its subcontractors to comply, with all applicable (i) professional canons and requirements governing avoidance of impermissible client conflicts; and (ii) federal, state and local conflict of interest laws and regulations including, without limitation, California Government Code Section 1090 et. seq., the California Political Reform Act (California Government Code Section 87100 et. seq.), the regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission concerning disclosure and disqualification (2 California Code of Regulations Section 18700 et. seq.) and Section 4-112 of the Fresno Municipal Code (Ineligibility to Compete). At any time, upon written request of CITY, CONSULTANT shall provide a written opinion of its legal counsel and that of any subcontractor that, after a due diligent inquiry, CONSULTANT and the respective subcontractor(s) are in full compliance with all laws and regulations. CONSULTANT shall take, and require its subcontractors to take, reasonable steps to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest. Upon discovery of any facts giving rise to the appearance of a conflict of interest, CONSULTANT shall immediately notify CITY of these facts in writing (c) In performing the work or services to be provided hereunder, CONSULTANT shall not employ or retain the services of any person while such person either is employed by CITY or is a member of any CITY council, commission, board, committee, or similar CITY body. This requirement may be waived in writing by the City Manager, if no actual or potential conflict is involved. (d) CONSULTANT represents and warrants that it has not paid or agreed to pay any compensation, contingent or otherwise, direct or indirect, to solicit or procure this Agreement or any rights/benefits hereunder. (e) Neither CONSULTANT, nor any of CONSULTANT’S subcontractors performing any services on this Project, shall bid for, assist anyone in the preparation of a bid for, or perform any services pursuant to, any other contract in connection with this Project. CONSULTANT and any of its subcontractors shall have no interest, direct or indirect, in any other contract with a third party in connection with this Project unless such interest is in accordance with all applicable law and fully disclosed to and approved by the City Manager, in advance and in writing. (f) If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the work to be performed or services to be provided under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall include the provisions of this Section 9 in each subcontract and require its subcontractors to comply therewith. DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 -6- (g) This Section 9 shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. 10. Recycling Program. In the event CONSULTANT maintains an office or operates a facility(ies), or is required herein to maintain or operate same, within the incorporated limits of the City of Fresno, CONSULTANT at its sole cost and expense shall: (i) Immediately establish and maintain a viable and ongoing recycling program, approved by CITY’S Solid Waste Management Division, for each office and facility. Literature describing CITY recycling programs is available from CITY’S Solid Waste Management Division and by calling City of Fresno Recycling Hotline at (559) 621-1111. (ii) Immediately contact CITY’S Solid Waste Management Division at (559) 621-1452 and schedule a free waste audit, and cooperate with such Division in their conduct of the audit for each office and facility. (iii) Cooperate with and demonstrate to the satisfaction of CITY’S Solid Waste Management Division the establishment of the recycling program in paragraph (i) above and the ongoing maintenance thereof. 11. General Terms. (a) Except as otherwise provided by law, all notices expressly required of CITY within the body of this Agreement, and not otherwise specifically provided for, shall be effective only if signed by the Director or his/her designee. (b) Records of CONSULTANT’S expenses pertaining to the Project shall be kept on a generally recognized accounting basis and shall be available to CITY or its authorized representatives upon request during regular business hours throughout the life of this Agreement and for a period of three years after final payment or, if longer, for any period required by law. In addition, all books, documents, papers, and records of CONSULTANT pertaining to the Project shall be available for the purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts, and transcriptions for the same period of time. If any litigation, claim, negotiations, audit or other action is commenced before the expiration of said time period, all records shall be retained and made available to CITY until such action is resolved, or until the end of said time period whichever shall later occur. If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall cause each subcontractor to also comply with the requirements of this paragraph. This Section 11(b) shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. (c) Prior to execution of this Agreement by CITY, CONSULTANT shall have provided evidence to CITY that CONSULTANT is licensed to perform the services called for by this Agreement (or that no license is required). If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the work or services to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall require each subcontractor to provide evidence to CITY that subcontractor is licensed to perform the services called for by this Agreement (or that no license is required) before beginning work. 12. Nondiscrimination. To the extent required by controlling federal, state and local law, CONSULTANT shall not employ discriminatory practices in the provision of services, employment of personnel, or in any other respect on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 -7- sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. Subject to the foregoing and during the performance of this Agreement, CONSULTANT agrees as follows: (a) CONSULTANT will comply with all applicable laws and regulations providing that no person shall, on the grounds of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any program or activity made possible by or resulting from this Agreement. (b) CONSULTANT will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. CONSULTANT shall ensure that applicants are employed, and the employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. Such requirement shall apply to CONSULTANT’S employment practices including, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. CONSULTANT agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provision of this nondiscrimination clause. (c) CONSULTANT will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of CONSULTANT in pursuit hereof, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. (d) CONSULTANT will send to each labor union or representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice advising such labor union or workers' representatives of CONSULTANT’S commitment under this section and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. (e) If CONSULTANT should subcontract all or any portion of the services to be performed under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall cause each subcontractor to also comply with the requirements of this Section 12. 13. Independent Contractor. (a) In the furnishing of the services provided for herein, CONSULTANT is acting solely as an independent contractor. Neither CONSULTANT, nor any of its officers, agents or employees shall be deemed an officer, agent, employee, joint venturer, partner or associate of CITY for any purpose. CITY shall have no right to control or supervise or direct the manner or method by which CONSULTANT shall perform its work and functions. However, CITY shall retain the right to administer this Agreement so as to verify that CONSULTANT is performing its obligations in accordance with the terms and conditions thereof. DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 -8- (b) This Agreement does not evidence a partnership or joint venture between CONSULTANT and CITY. CONSULTANT shall have no authority to bind CITY absent CITY’S express written consent. Except to the extent otherwise provided in this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall bear its own costs and expenses in pursuit thereof. (c) Because of its status as an independent contractor, CONSULTANT and its officers, agents and employees shall have absolutely no right to employment rights and benefits available to CITY employees. CONSULTANT shall be solely liable and responsible for all payroll and tax withholding and for providing to, or on behalf of, its employees all employee benefits including, without limitation, health, welfare and retirement benefits. In addition, together with its other obligations under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall be solely responsible, indemnify, defend and save CITY harmless from all matters relating to employment and tax withholding for and payment of CONSULTANT'S employees, including, without limitation, (i) compliance with Social Security and unemployment insurance withholding, payment of workers’ compensation benefits, and all other laws and regulations governing matters of employee withholding, taxes and payment; and (ii) any claim of right or interest in CITY employment benefits, entitlements, programs and/or funds offered employees of CITY whether arising by reason of any common law, de facto, leased, or co-employee rights or other theory. It is acknowledged that during the term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT may be providing services to others unrelated to CITY or to this Agreement. 14. Notices. Any notice required or intended to be given to either party under the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be duly given if delivered personally, transmitted by facsimile followed by telephone confirmation of receipt, or sent by United States registered or certified mail, with postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the party to which notice is to be given at the party's address set forth on the signature page of this Agreement or at such other address as the parties may from time to time designate by written notice. Notices served by United States mail in the manner above described shall be deemed sufficiently served or given at the time of the mailing thereof. 15. Binding. Subject to Section 16, below, once this Agreement is signed by all parties, it shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, all parties, and each parties' respective heirs, successors, assigns, transferees, agents, servants, employees and representatives. 16. Assignment. (a) This Agreement is personal to CONSULTANT and there shall be no assignment by CONSULTANT of its rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written approval of the City Manager or his/her designee. Any attempted assignment by CONSULTANT, its successors or assigns, shall be null and void unless approved in writing by the City Manager or his/her designee. (b) CONSULTANT hereby agrees not to assign the payment of any monies due CONSULTANT from CITY under the terms of this Agreement to any other individual(s), corporation(s) or entity(ies). CITY retains the right to pay any and all monies due CONSULTANT directly to CONSULTANT. 17. Compliance With Law. In providing the services required under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall at all times comply with all applicable laws of the United States, the State of California and CITY, and with all applicable regulations promulgated by federal, state, regional, DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 -9- or local administrative and regulatory agencies, now in force and as they may be enacted, issued, or amended during the term of this Agreement. 18. Waiver. The waiver by either party of a breach by the other of any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same or a different provision of this Agreement. No provisions of this Agreement may be waived unless in writing and signed by all parties to this Agreement. Waiver of any one provision herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other provision herein. 19. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of California, excluding, however, any conflict of laws rule which would apply the law of another jurisdiction. Venue for purposes of the filing of any action regarding the enforcement or interpretation of this Agreement and any rights and duties hereunder shall be Fresno County, California. 20. Headings. The section headings in this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not be construed or held in any way to explain, modify or add to the interpretation or meaning of the provisions of this Agreement. 21. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. The invalidity, or unenforceability of any one provision in this Agreement shall not affect the other provisions. 22. Interpretation. The parties acknowledge that this Agreement in its final form is the result of the combined efforts of the parties and that, should any provision of this Agreement be found to be ambiguous in any way, such ambiguity shall not be resolved by construing this Agreement in favor of or against either party, but rather by construing the terms in accordance with their generally accepted meaning. 23. Attorney's Fees. If either party is required to commence any proceeding or legal action to enforce or interpret any term, covenant or condition of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such proceeding or action shall be entitled to recover from the other party its reasonable attorney's fees and legal expenses. 24. Exhibits. Each exhibit and attachment referenced in this Agreement is, by the reference, incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement. 25. Precedence of Documents. In the event of any conflict between the body of this Agreement and any Exhibit or Attachment hereto, the terms and conditions of the body of this Agreement shall control and take precedence over the terms and conditions expressed within the Exhibit or Attachment. Furthermore, any terms or conditions contained within any Exhibit or Attachment hereto which purport to modify the allocation of risk between the parties, provided for within the body of this Agreement, shall be null and void. 26. Cumulative Remedies. No remedy or election hereunder shall be deemed exclusive but shall, wherever possible, be cumulative with all other remedies at law or in equity. 27. No Third Party Beneficiaries. The rights, interests, duties and obligations defined within this Agreement are intended for the specific parties hereto as identified in the preamble of this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything stated to the contrary in this Agreement, it is not intended that any rights or interests in this Agreement benefit or flow to the interest of any third parties. DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 -10- 28. Extent of Agreement. Each party acknowledges that they have read and fully understand the contents of this Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be modified only by written instrument duly authorized and executed by both CITY and CONSULTANT. / / / / / / / / / DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 -11- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement at Fresno, California, the day and year first above written. CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation By: Randall W. Morrison, PE, MCE, Assistant Director Public Works Department ATTEST: YVONNE SPENCE, CMC City Clerk By: Deputy No signature of City Attorney required. Standard Document #DPW-S 28.0 has been used without modification, as certified by the undersigned. By: John Honey, PE Professional Engineer Public Works Department REVIEWED BY: Scott Tyler, PE, Public Works Manager Public Works Department Addresses: CITY: City of Fresno Attention: John Honey, PE, Professional Engineer 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 Phone: (559) 621-8651 FAX: (559) n/a SWCA Environmental Consultants, A California Corporation By: Name: Title: (if corporation or LLC, Board Chair, Pres. or Vice Pres.) By: Name: Title: (if corporation or LLC, CFO, Treasurer, Secretary or Assistant Secretary) Any Applicable Professional License: Number: Name: Date of Issuance: CONSULTANT: SWCA Environmental Consultants Attention: Jacqueline Markley, M.S., AICP, Project Manager 1422 Monterey Street, B-C200 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Phone: (916) 234-5522 FAX: n/a Attachments: 1. Exhibit A - Scope of Services 2. Exhibit B - Insurance Requirements 3. Exhibit C - Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form Robert L. Kroeger Senior Vice President Denis Henry Chief Financial Officer DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 Page 1 of 5 Exhibit A SCOPE OF SERVICES Consultant Service Agreement between City of Fresno (“City”) and SWCA Environmental Consultants (“Consultant”) Polk Avenue Widening Project PROJECT TITLE TASK 1: EXISTING INFORMATION REVIEW Prior to initiating preparation of the required technical studies, SWCA staff will review all existing project documentation, including the updated Preliminary Environmental Study (PES), preliminary design plans, any available Caltrans exhibits, and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document prepared for proposed project. TASK 2: ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES AND TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS The following scope of work is based on the City’s Notice for Consulting Services and the proposed project’s updated PES, dated February 28, 2020. TASK 2.2: NOISE STUDY REPORT SWCA will coordinate with AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting for the preparation of the Noise Study Report (NSR). In accordance with Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) and Caltrans requirements, a NSR will be prepared to assess noise impacts associated with the proposed project. The NSR will include a description of the existing noise environment based on existing environmental documentation and a review of site reconnaissance data. AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting will conduct ambient noise monitoring at various locations in the vicinity of the project site to document existing environmental conditions and traffic noise levels. Short-term (i.e., 10-60 minute) and long-term (i.e., 24-hour) noise measurement surveys will be conducted. Ambient traffic noise levels will be monitored during peak-hour periods for purposes of calibrating the traffic noise model. Relevant background information, including noise fundamentals, descriptors, and applicable federal, state, and local regulatory framework, will be described. To assess potential construction noise impacts, sensitive receptors and their relative exposure to the proposed project area (considering topographic barriers and distance) will be identified. Noise levels of specific construction equipment will be summarized in the report. Predicted construction- generated noise levels at nearby receptors will be calculated using the FHWA’s Roadway Construction Noise Model (version 1.0). Traffic noise modeling will be conducted in accordance with FHWA/Caltrans-recommended methodologies and guidance. Accordingly, predicted traffic noise levels will be modeled using the FHWA Traffic Noise Model, version 2.5. The TNM model will be calibrated based on the monitoring data obtained during the site reconnaissance surveys. Predicted average-hourly traffic noise levels (in Leq) will be calculated at nearby existing receptors for comparison to FHWA/Caltrans-recommended noise abatement criteria. Average- daily noise levels (in CNEL/Ldn) will also be calculated for comparison to applicable City noise standards and included in the appendix of the NSR. DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 Page 2 of 5 Groundborne vibration impacts are anticipated to be minor and, therefore, will be qualitatively assessed. Groundborne vibration levels typically associated with construction activities and long- term operations will be discussed, based on information to be derived from Caltrans- recommended guidance documents. The technical memorandum will include a description of the existing noise environment, based on existing environmental documentation and a review of site reconnaissance data. The site reconnaissance will be conducted for identification of nearby noise-sensitive land uses and existing ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. Up to five short-term (i.e., 10-15 minute) noise measurement surveys will be conducted. Relevant background information, including noise fundamentals, descriptors, and applicable federal, state, and local regulatory framework will be summarized. Noise and groundborne vibration impacts associated with construction of the proposed project will be quantitatively assessed. Construction-generated noise levels will be quantified using the FHWA’s Roadway Construction Noise Model. Construction-generated noise levels at the nearest land uses will be identified and summarized in tabular format within the report. Construction- generated groundborne vibration levels typically associated with construction equipment and commonly applied thresholds for structural damage and human annoyance will be identified based on existing FHWA/Caltrans documentation. Predicted groundborne vibration levels the nearest existing structures will be quantified and summarized in tabular format within the report. A bioacoustics analysis is not anticipated to be required and is not included. The significance of noise-related impacts will be determined in comparison to applicable FHWA/Caltrans noise abatement criteria. Noise abatement measures will be identified and evaluated, to the extent necessary. This discussion will also address Caltrans-recommended control practices, as well as applicable City requirements for the control of construction-generated noise. TASK 2.3: AIR QUALITY REPORT SWCA will coordinate with AMBIENT Air Quality & Noise Consulting for the preparation of the Air Quality Report (AQR). The AQR will be prepared using the Caltrans AQR template and in accordance with FHWA- and Caltrans-recommended methodologies. The AQR will assess air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts associated with the proposed project. Existing air quality and GHG conditions will be discussed, including applicable regulatory framework, standards, and attainment status. Field monitoring of meteorology and pollutant emissions is not anticipated to be required for this project and is not included in this scope of work. Short-term construction and long-term operational emissions of criteria air pollutants and GHG emissions will be quantified. Construction emissions will be quantified based on project-specific construction information and schedules, to be provided, and long-term operational emissions of criteria air pollutants and GHGs will be quantified based on data to be derived from the traffic analysis prepared for this project. Emissions will be quantified utilizing the most current recommended guidance and methodologies available. The project’s conformity with regional and project-level air quality attainment efforts will be discussed. Localized increases in mobile-source emissions attributable to this project, including carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM), and mobile-source air toxics, are anticipated to be minor DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 Page 3 of 5 and, therefore, will be qualitatively assessed utilizing FHWA/Caltrans-recommended screening protocol. The proposed project is not anticipated to trigger the need for quantitative assessment of localized air quality impacts. Measures for the control of construction emissions will be discussed, and will address Caltrans- recommended control practices, as well as applicable rules and regulations required by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). TASK 2.5: RELOCATION IMPACTS MEMORANDUM SWCA understands that the proposed project could require the need for relocation of existing structures. According to Caltrans, any structure relocation requires relocation impact documentation. The format of the Relocation Impact Document is dependent upon the complexity of the project as determined by the number of displacements and the availability of replacement property. Based on the PES, a Relocation Impact Memorandum (RIM) is the appropriate document for this project, which is prepared if there are fewer than 10 displacements and there is ample replacement property. SWCA’s environmental planners will conduct a field review of the proposed project to determine the potential impact on the residential and nonresidential units, and prepare the RIM for this project in accordance with Caltrans Right of Way Manual Exhibit 10-EX-3. At a minimum, the RIM will include the number of occupants displaced, the typical vacancy rate for each type of displacement (e.g., 5% vacancy rate for multi-residential units), identification of any special needs such as elderly or handicapped displacees, and a statement that the Right-of-Way office has sufficient resources (experienced staff and capital dollars) to complete the relocations in accordance with policies and procedures. TASK 2.7: CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY Based on the PES, an Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) and a Historic Resources Evaluation Report (HRER) have been identified as the appropriate level of review for this project. Detailed tasks associated with the preparation of the ASR and HRER, including preparation of an Area of Potential Effects (APE) map, are discussed below. Area of Potential Effects Map SWCA will assist the City in the preparation an APE map that includes a delineation of the area of direct impact and area of indirect effects. The map will depict existing and proposed right-of- way, staging areas, and the location of any cultural resources identified in the APE. The map will be created at a scale of 1”:200’ and printed on 11 × 17 sheets. The APE map will also include the appropriate signature blocks for Caltrans reviewers. Archaeological Survey Report Records Search SWCA will conduct a records search for the project area at the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC), located at California State University, Bakersfield. SWCA assumes that Caltrans will require up to a 1- mile search radius. Native American Coordination DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 Page 4 of 5 Pursuant to 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 800.4(a)(3), preparation of the ASR will include coordination with up to 20 local Native American individuals and groups who may have knowledge of, or concerns about, Native American resources in the area. SWCA will initiate this task by contacting the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request a Sacred Lands File search and to request a list of Native American contacts. Upon receipt of the Sacred Lands File search, SWCA will prepare and mail letters to each of the NAHC-listed contacts, requesting information, in writing, concerning any Native American religious or cultural resources within or immediately adjacent to the project area. Up to two telephone calls will be made to each of the Native American groups on the NAHC list to document good-faith efforts at follow-up. This consultation is for National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 purposes only. SWCA assumes that the City will submit an Assembly Bill (AB) 52 letter separately for compliance under CEQA. Archaeological Survey Report SWCA will conduct an intensive-level archaeological survey of the area of direct impacts. SWCA will survey the APE and prepare updates to the California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 Series forms for the portion of the site within the APE. No testing or excavation will be conducted, nor will any artifacts, samples, or specimens be collected during the survey. Upon completion of the field survey, SWCA will prepare the ASR according to Caltrans’ current guidance as specified in Caltrans SER Volume 2. The ASR will document the results of the records search, Native American scoping, and field survey. The report will include maps depicting the area surveyed for cultural resources. Locations of sensitive archaeological sites or Native American cultural resources may be depicted or described in the report and will be considered confidential; therefore, the report may not be distributed to the public. This report will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review. Historic Resources Evaluation Report SWCA understands that portions of the areas surrounding the APE were historically developed, and historical resources may be required to be evaluated as part of the cultural resource studies. SWCA understands that several prior studies (including those prepared for Caltrans for work along State Route 99) have been conducted within and near the APE, which upon receipt of the records search effort described previously, will be reviewed for adequacy and applicability to the current project. The following is a basic summary of steps taken to complete the HRER. Local Governments/Local Historic Group Coordination Pursuant to 36 CFR 800.4(a)(3), documentation will include coordination with up to five individuals and organizations who may have knowledge of, or concerns with, historic properties in the area. Coordination will include inquiries to local governments and historic groups regarding their knowledge of historic properties in the immediate vicinity of the APE. Up to two telephone calls will be made to each of the groups to document “good-faith” efforts of follow-up. Built Environment Survey, Archival Research, and Department of Parks and Recreation Forms Our qualified architectural history team, led by Paula Carr, a former Caltrans Senior Architectural Historian, is highly familiar with the SER Volume 2, Cultural Resources: Exhibit 1.1, which outlines the Programmatic Agreement (PA) released in 2014. In addition to providing guidance for the DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 Page 5 of 5 assessment of effects to historic properties, the Caltrans PA provides evaluation exemptions for various types of properties within the APE, including those that visibly lack integrity. Per Caltrans requirements, SWCA qualified architectural historians will direct an intensive-level survey of the entire APE to identify and document previously unrecorded historic properties that may be impacted by the proposed project. For the purposes of this proposal and cost estimate, SWCA assumes that the APE will include the direct project footprint and any adjacent buildings, structures, or objects. During the survey, architectural historians will record each property address within the APE using tablet computers prepopulated with relevant data about the project area and its setting to streamline and accelerate the field recordation process. Field documentation will also include digital photographs of each property to support field observations. Following the field survey, archival research will be conducted to ascertain the age, alterations, and significance of each architectural resource. The archival research will entail a review of historic documents, records, and photographs for information about each property and resources that may be contained therein. Properties that are found to be significantly altered and no longer contain sufficient integrity to convey their historical significance will be exempted from further study, in accordance with the Caltrans PA. Details of these properties and the justification for their exemption will be presented to the Caltrans reviewer for concurrence. Properties that do not qualify for exemption in accordance with the Caltrans PA will be formally recorded on individual DPR Series 523 forms and will be evaluated for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and for local listing. SWCA understands that the project area is highly urbanized with buildings older than 45 years of age, some of which have not been previously evaluated for historical significance. SWCA assumes that a maximum of four properties containing buildings of historic age, that cannot be exempted in accordance with the Caltrans PA, are located within the project area and would require recordation on DPR forms. Should additional resources older than 45 years be identified within the project area, SWCA would request a change order to conduct the additional work. Historical Resources Evaluation Report Upon completion of the APE map, coordination with local historical groups, and the built environment survey and archival research, SWCA will prepare an HRER. The HRER will be prepared according to current guidance as specified in Caltrans SER Volume 2. SWCA assumes only one revision to the HRER will be required. DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 Page 1 of 4 Exhibit B INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Consultant Service Agreement between City of Fresno (“CITY”) and SWCA Environmental Consultants (“CONSULTANT”) Polk Avenue Widening Project PROJECT TITLE MINIMUM SCOPE OF INSURANCE Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. The most current version of Insurance Services Office (ISO) Commercial General Liability Coverage Form CG 00 01, providing liability coverage arising out of your business operations. The Commercial General Liability policy shall be written on an occurrence form and shall provide coverage for “bodily injury,” “property damage” and “personal and advertising injury” with coverage for premises and operations (including the use of owned and non-owned equipment), products and completed operations, and contractual liability (including, without limitation, indemnity obligations under the Agreement) with limits of liability not less than those set forth under “Minimum Limits of Insurance.” 2. The most current version of ISO *Commercial Auto Coverage Form CA 00 01, providing liability coverage arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of automobiles in the course of your business operations. The Automobile Policy shall be written on an occurrence form and shall provide coverage for all owned, hired, and non-owned automobiles or other licensed vehicles (Code 1- Any Auto). If personal automobile coverage is used, the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be listed as additional insureds. 3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer’s Liability Insurance. 4. Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) insurance appropriate to CONSULTANT’S profession. Architect’s and engineer’s coverage is to be endorsed to include contractual liability. MINIMUM LIMITS OF INSURANCE CONSULTANT, or any party the CONSULTANT subcontracts with, shall maintain limits of liability of not less than those set forth below. However, insurance limits available to CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers as additional insureds, shall be the greater of the minimum limits specified herein or the full limit of any insurance proceeds available to the named insured: 1. COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY: (i) $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage; (ii) $1,000,000 per occurrence for personal and advertising injury; (iii) $2,000,000 aggregate for products and completed operations; and, DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 Page 2 of 4 (iv) $2,000,000 general aggregate applying separately to the work performed under the Agreement. 2. COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. OR* PERSONAL AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY insurance with limits of liability not less than: (i) $100,000 per person; (ii) $300,000 per accident for bodily injury; and, (iii) $50,000 per accident for property damage. 3. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION INSURANCE as required by the State of California with statutory limits. 4. EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY: (i) $1,000,000 each accident for bodily injury; (ii) $1,000,000 disease each employee; and, (iii) $1,000,000 disease policy limit. 5. PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY (Errors and Omissions): (i) $1,000,000 per claim/occurrence; and, (ii) $2,000,000 policy aggregate. UMBRELLA OR EXCESS INSURANCE In the event CONSULTANT purchases an Umbrella or Excess insurance policy(ies) to meet the “Minimum Limits of Insurance,” this insurance policy(ies) shall “follow form” and afford no less coverage than the primary insurance policy(ies). In addition, such Umbrella or Excess insurance policy(ies) shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. DEDUCTIBLES AND SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS CONSULTANT shall be responsible for payment of any deductibles contained in any insurance policy(ies) required herein and CONSULTANT shall also be responsible for payment of any self- insured retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared on the Certificate of Insurance, and approved by, the CITY’S Risk Manager or his/her designee. At the option of the CITY’S Risk Manager or his/her designee, either: (i) The insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers; or DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 Page 3 of 4 (ii) CONSULTANT shall provide a financial guarantee, satisfactory to CITY’S Risk Manager or his/her designee, guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. At no time shall CITY be responsible for the payment of any deductibles or self- insured retentions. OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS/ENDORSEMENTS The General Liability and Automobile Liability insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds. CONSULTANT shall establish additional insured status for the City and for all ongoing and completed operations by use of ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 or both CG 20 10 10 01 and CG 20 37 10 01 or by an executed manuscript insurance company endorsement providing additional insured status as broad as that contained in ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85. 2. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits and coverage shall be available to the Additional Insured. 3. For any claims related to this Agreement, CONSULTANT’S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers shall be excess of CONSULTANT’S insurance and shall not contribute with it. CONSULTANT shall establish primary and non-contributory status by using ISO Form CG 20 01 04 13 or by an executed manuscript insurance company endorsement that provides primary and non-contributory status as broad as that contained in ISO Form CG 20 01 04 13. The Workers’ Compensation insurance policy is to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provision: CONSULTANT and its insurer shall waive any right of subrogation against CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. If the Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) insurance policy is written on a claims-made form: 1. The retroactive date must be shown, and must be before the effective date of the Agreement or the commencement of work by CONSULTANT. 2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the Agreement work or termination of the Agreement, whichever occurs first, or, in the alternative, the policy shall be endorsed to provide not less than a five (5) year discovery period. 3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims- made policy form with a retroactive date prior to the effective date of the Agreement or the commencement of work by CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT must purchase DPW-S 28.0 /03-24-14 Page 4 of 4 “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of the Agreement work or termination of the Agreement, whichever occurs first. 4. A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to CITY for review. 5. These requirements shall survive expiration or termination of the Agreement. All policies of insurance required herein shall be endorsed to provide that the coverage shall not be cancelled, non-renewed, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) calendar days written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to CITY. CONSULTANT is also responsible for providing written notice to the CITY under the same terms and conditions. Upon issuance by the insurer, broker, or agent of a notice of cancellation, non-renewal, or reduction in coverage or in limits, CONSULTANT shall furnish CITY with a new certificate and applicable endorsements for such policy(ies). In the event any policy is due to expire during the work to be performed for CITY, CONSULTANT shall provide a new certificate, and applicable endorsements, evidencing renewal of such policy not less than fifteen (15) calendar days prior to the expiration date of the expiring policy. VERIFICATION OF COVERAGE CONSULTANT shall furnish CITY with all certificate(s) and applicable endorsements effecting coverage required hereunder. All certificates and applicable endorsements are to be received and approved by the CITY’S Risk Manager or his/her designee prior to CITY’S execution of the Agreement and before work commences. All non-ISO endorsements amending policy coverage shall be executed by a licensed and authorized agent or broker. Upon request of CITY, CONSULTANT shall immediately furnish City with a complete copy of any insurance policy required under this Agreement, including all endorsements, with said copy certified by the underwriter to be a true and correct copy of the original policy. This requirement shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. Exhibit C DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Polk Avenue Widening Project PROJECT TITLE YES* NO 1 Are you currently in litigation with the City of Fresno or any of its agents? 2 Do you represent any firm, organization or person who is in litigation with the City of Fresno? 3 Do you currently represent or perform work for any clients who do business with the City of Fresno? 4 Are you or any of your principals, managers or professionals, owners or investors in a business which does business with the City of Fresno, or in a business which is in litigation with the City of Fresno? 5 Are you or any of your principals, managers or professionals, related by blood or marriage to any City of Fresno employee who has any significant role in the subject matter of this service? 6 Do you or any of your subcontractors have, or expect to have, any interest, direct or indirect, in any other contract in connection with this Project? * If the answer to any question is yes, please explain in full below. Explanation: Signature Date (name) (company) (address) Additional page(s) attached. (city state zip) City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00589 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-E REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department THROUGH:RANDALL W. MORRISON, PE, Assistant Director Public Works Department, Engineering Division BY:JASON A. CAMIT, PLS, Chief Surveyor Public Works Department, Engineering Division, Right of Way Section SUBJECT Actions pertaining to Resolution of Intent Number 1137-D to vacate a portion of Mono Street and a portion of the R Street and S Street alley, east of R Street (Council District 3) 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption for Environmental Assessment Number P19-02935 per staffs determination,pursuant to Section 15301/Class 1 and Section 15303/Class 3 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 2.Adopt Resolution of Intent Number 1137-D to vacate a portion of Mono Street and a portion of the R-S alley, east of R Street RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the City Council adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption for Environmental Assessment Number P19-02935 and adopt Resolution of Intent Number 1137-D for the proposed vacation of a portion of Mono Street and a portion of the R Street and S Street alley,east of R Street, and set the required public hearing at 10:00 a.m. on June 11, 2020. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Moore-Twinning is requesting the vacation of a portion of Mono Street and a portion of the R Street and S Street alley,east of R Street as shown on Exhibit “A”of the attached Resolution of Intent.The purpose of this vacation is to allow the adjacent property owners to secure the area,which has had homeless issues. BACKGROUND This portion of Mono Street and that portion of the R Street and S Street alley,east of R Street was originally dedicated by the Plat of the City of Fresno in 1888.The construction of State Route 41 created a dead end street on the east portion of Mono Street,east of R Street.The dead end street City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00589 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-E created a dead end street on the east portion of Mono Street,east of R Street.The dead end street created traffic circulation issues in this area.East of this proposed vacation area,a portion of Mono Street and a portion of the R Street and S Street alley,east of R Street were previously vacated by Resolution Number 80-15 recorded January 22,1980 as Instrument Number 7808,Official Records Fresno County.This previous vacation was executed to accommodate development for the Huntington Park Condominiums.The previous street vacation added to traffic circulation issues by creating an additional dead end alley.In addition to the traffic circulation issues,the dead end street and alleys are now being used for homeless encampments.The applicant would like to vacate the remaining portion of Mono Street and the remaining portion of the R Street and S Street alley,east of R Street to close off the street to help prevent the homeless encampments and help secure the area. The Public Works Department,other City departments and utility agencies have reviewed the proposed vacation and determined that the public street right of way proposed for vacation is unnecessary for present or prospective public street purposes as shown on Exhibit “A”,subject to the conditions of approval as listed in Exhibit “B”,said exhibits are included in the attached Resolution of Intent. The City Attorney’s Office has approved the attached Resolution of Intention as to form. The vacation,if approved by the Council at the public hearing,will become effective when the vacating resolution is recorded in the office of the Fresno County Recorder,but not until the City Engineer determines that the conditions listed in the attached resolution have been satisfied and accepted by the City. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Staff has performed a preliminary environmental assessment of this project and determined that it falls within the Categorical Exemption set for in the following Sections of the CEQA Guidelines: Under Section 15301/Class 1, the proposed project is exempt from CEQA requirements. Section 15301(Class 1/Existing Facilities)consists of the operation,repair,maintenance,permitting, leasing,licensing,or minor alteration of existing public or private structures,facilities,mechanical equipment,or topographical features involving negligible or no Expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination.The types of "existing facilities”itemized are not intended to be all inclusive of the types of projects which might fall with Class 1.This project consists of vacating a portion of a public street easement to resolve a homeless encampment issue.It does not propose the expansion of any current use of this land. Under Section 15303/Class 3, the proposed project is exempt from CEQA requirements. Section 15303 (Class 3/New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures)of the CEQA Guidelines exempts from the provisions of CEQA,projects consisting of the construction and location of limited numbers of new,small facilities or structures;installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures;and,the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another where only minor modifications are made to the exterior of the structure.Examples include but are not limited to:Water main,sewage,electrical,gas and other utility extensions,including street improvements of reasonable length to serve such construction.This project proposes to vacate a public street and construction a fence and minor street improvements to prevent trespassing andCity of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00589 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-E public street and construction a fence and minor street improvements to prevent trespassing and resolve a homeless encampment issue. The current use of this land will remain the same. The proposed project consists of vacation of a dead-end street and alley between abutting Freeway 41 totaling 14,695 square feet.The area being abandoned has a reoccurring homeless encampment with significant vandalism to the neighboring properties.The proposed project is consistent with the Fresno General Plan and the Downtown Plan without negatively impacting the characteristics of the area and complies with all conditions described in Section 15301/Class 1 and 15303/Class 3, California CEQA Guidelines.None-of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines,Section 15300.2 apply to this project.Furthermore,the proposed project is not expected to have a significant effect on the environment.Accordingly,as the area is not environmentally sensitive, as noted above, a categorical exemption has been prepare for the project. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference does not apply because the vacation of a public street easement does not involve bidding or contracting. FISCAL IMPACT This project has no impact to the General Fund and is located in Council District 3.Moore-Twinning has paid all processing fees to cover staff cost in accordance with the Master Fee Schedule. Attachments: Mono Vacation Vicinity Map Mono Vacation Environmental Assessment Mono Vacation Resolution of Intent 1137-D City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ BARSTOW GARFIELDBRYANPOLKBLYTHEVALENTINEVAN NESSFRUITSIERRA ALLUVIAL GETTYSBURG DAKOTA CLINTON OLIVE NIELSON KEARNEY ANNADALE INTERNATIONAL PERRIN TEAGUE ALLUVIALMAROAFRESNOMILLBROOKMAPLEWILLOW MINNEWAWASUNNYSIDEARMSTRONGMAPLEORANGECHERRYFIGCHURCH BUTLER TULARE LOCANDAKOTA CLINTON OLIVE FRUITHUGHESVALENTINEBLYTHEPOLKBRYANN ENGINEERING SERVICES DIVISION DISTRICT 3 Assessor's Parcel Number 468-114-17 2 of 3 may appear before the Council and be heard in relation thereto. 2. The Council elects to proceed under the provisions of Chapter 3, commencing with Section 8320, of the Public Streets, Highways, and Service Easements Vacation Law of the State of California (California Street and Highways Code Sections 8300 et seq.). 3. The Public Works Director of the City is directed to cause notices of the proposed vacation to be published and posted for the time and in the manner prescribed by the provisions of Sections 8322 and 8323 of the California Streets and Highways Code. 4. The Council preliminarily determines that the public street proposed to be vacated is not useful as a bicycle path or route under applicable general, specific, or community plans and policies. If the Council does not rescind such preliminary determination, based on evidence or p ublic testimony presented to it, orally or in writing, at or before the June 11, 2020, hearing, the Council may proceed to make a final determination, at the public hearing, that the public street be vacated as provided herein. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 3 of 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF FRESNO ) ss. CITY OF FRESNO ) I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2020. AYES : NOES : ABSENT : ABSTAIN : YVONNE SPENCE, MMC CRM City Clerk BY: Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: DOUGLAS T. SLOAN City Attorney BY: Date Deputy City Attorney Attachments: Exhibit “A” PW File No. 12249 EXHIBIT "A" TRACT NO. 331 8 Pl.ATS 84, fCR i q X w N <O I a, V) 1-z w :::. ::::, (J 0 0 3-u :::. a....."'""'co a, '<O I w :::. �EE2J tw4AI IND/CA TES EASEMENT RESERVED PER R.0./. 761-0 IND/CA TES AREA PR£VIOUSL Y ABANDONED PER R.0./. 76J-JJ_ IND/CA TES AREA TO BE ABANDONED 14,695 SO.FT. ( ... ) /!,�: RECORD DA TA PER TRACT No. 3318 FILED IN VOLUME 36 OF PLATS AT PC. 84, F.C.R. PREPARED BY: 40' 40' � DALIG.DLL 6 A.880CIA TES ENGINEERING & SURVEYING SERVICES 2090 NORTH WINERY AVENUE, FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93703 {559) 292-4046 • FAX 251-9220 • EMAIL STAFF@OALEMELL.COM 40' 40' 29 2S 25 - i I '"' - r------ SCALE: l' =80 I BY: d. m-12/26//8 OMA CADRLE: /8-/62EXOI 0 1--------,.------------�-=�=-::-:--:-::-------r:::::-:-:::-------:----:c:::::-o-----:---J � REF & REV CITY Of FRESNO :':'a!.====== �s =---o 201 _-; DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS oRG. No. Ill p WF . p ARCEL TO BE DEOICA 1ED TO lHE CITY OF FRESNO OR. BY: SHEET NO. _. _ OF_. _ SHffTS � PLAT AS AN EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR ;;·:� g PUBLIC SlREET PURPOSES SCALE:_�;;AS ;; S ;; HO ;; WN ;;.i_.;.;15;.-_A;.;..-_ .. a.._ ______________________________ _ EXHIBIT “B” VACATION CONDITION OF APPROVAL The following condition must be met before the vacation resolution can be recorded: 1. This project will require the applicant to reserve a public utility easement over the entire area being vacated. If any existing utilities need to be relocated, they must be approved by the associated utility company and/or utility department. Any relocation will be at the expense of the applicant. 2. The City of Fresno Traffic Engineering Division requires the applicant to remove all existing public improvements within the area being vacated. Curb, gutter, and sidewalk must also be constructed along the R Street frontage and adjust any existing utilities, as needed. The applicant must install full offsite improvements where needed. They must salvage any signage and utilities to the associated utility companies and/or City departments. The proposed vacation will result in an adjacent property being landlocked (assessor’s parcel number 468 -114-13). Access must be provided to this parcel or a parcel merger with assessor’s parcel number 468-114-17 must be performed. PW File 12249 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00590 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-F REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department BY:RANDALL W. MORRISON, PE, Assistant Director Public Works Department, Engineering Division JASON A. CAMIT, PLS, Chief Surveyor Public Works Department, Engineering Division - Chief Surveyor Section SUBJECT Actions pertaining to the summary vacation of a portion of North Parkway Drive and a pedestrian easement south of West Weldon Avenue (Council District 3) 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption per staff determination,pursuant to Section 15301 (c)/Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines,Environmental Assessment Number PW12149 2.***RESOLUTION -Ordering the summary vacation of a portion of North Parkway Drive and a pedestrian easement south of West Weldon Avenue (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the Council adopt a Categorical Exemption for Environmental Assessment Number PW12149;and adopt a resolution ordering the summary vacation of a portion of North Parkway Drive and a pedestrian easement south of West Weldon Avenue,as described in Exhibit “A”, as shown on Exhibit “B” and detailed in Exhibit “C” of the attached resolution. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The State of California is requesting the vacation of a portion of North Parkway Drive and a pedestrian easement south of West Weldon Avenue.The purpose of the vacation is to eliminate excessive public street right-of-way and accommodate the development of the adjacent property. BACKGROUND The proposed vacation is needed to vacate public street and pedestrian easements that are remnants and are no longer needed,as a result of the realignment of State Route 99 associated with the High Speed Rail construction.The project also realigned North Parkway Drive and created City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00590 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-F the High Speed Rail construction.The project also realigned North Parkway Drive and created excess public street right-of-way at the old North Parkway Drive alignment,along with an excess pedestrian walkway easement.The adjacent property owner would like to incorporate this excess right-of-way into land for future development and remove public easements on the property which no longer serve any purpose. The Public Works Department,other City Departments and utility agencies have reviewed this proposal and determined that the street and pedestrian right-of-way proposed for vacation is unnecessary for present or prospective public purposes. The provisions of Chapter 4,commencing with Section 8330 of the California Streets and Highways Code,authorize the Council to summarily vacate public street and pedestrian easements that are considered excess right-of-way,are not required for street or highway purposes,and has no public utility facilities within the area to be vacated.Under these provisions,only one Council action is necessary and a published notice, posting and public hearing are not required. The City Attorney's Office has approved the attached resolution as to form. The vacation,if approved by the Council,will become effective when the vacating resolution is recorded in the office of the Fresno County Recorder. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This project is exempt under Section 15301/Class 1 (Existing Facilities)of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Section 15301 (Class 1/Existing Facilities)of the CEQA Guidelines exempts from the provisions of CEQA,projects consisting of the operation,repair,maintenance,permitting,leasing,or minor alteration of existing public or private structures,facilities,mechanical equipment,or topographical features,involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency’s determination.Examples include but are not limited to:Existing facilities of both investor and publicly owned utilities used to provide electric power,natural gas,sewerage,or other public utility services;and,existing highways and streets,sidewalks,gutters,bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities (this includes road grading for the purpose of public safety).The City of Fresno will not make any physical changes to this public street.The City will only be vacating a portion of a public street and pedestrian easements that are no longer necessary for public use which qualifies for this categorical exemption. The proposed vacation of the above-described land meets the criteria noted above.There is no substantial evidence in the record that any of the exceptions to these Categorical Exemptions,set forth in CEQA Guidelines,Section 15300.2 apply to this project.Therefore,no adverse environmental impacts will occur as a result of the proposed project. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference does not apply because the vacation of public right-of-way does not involve bidding or contracting. City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00590 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-F FISCAL IMPACT There will be no City funds involved with this vacation.The State of California has paid all processing fees to cover staff cost in accordance with the Master Fee Schedule. Attachments: Vicinity Map Parkway Drive Environmental Assessment Number PW12149 Resolution Summary Parkway Drive City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ BARSTOW GARFIELDBRYANPOLKBLYTHEVALENTINEVAN NESSFRUITSIERRA ALLUVIAL GETTYSBURG DAKOTA CLINTON OLIVE NIELSON KEARNEY ANNADALE INTERNATIONAL PERRIN TEAGUE ALLUVIALMAROAFRESNOMILLBROOKMAPLEWILLOW MINNEWAWASUNNYSIDEARMSTRONGMAPLEORANGECHERRYFIGCHURCH BUTLER TULARE LOCANDAKOTA CLINTON OLIVE FRUITHUGHESVALENTINEBLYTHEPOLKBRYANN ENGINEERING SERVICES DIVISION DISTRICT 3 Assessor's Parcel Numbers 442-112-04 RESOLUTION NO. ----- A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF A PORTION OF NORTH PARKWAY DRIVE AND A PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT SOUTH OF WEST WELDON AVENUE WHEREAS, the Council has elected to proceed under the provisions of the Public Streets, Highways, and Service Easements Vacation Law (Division 9, Part 3 of the California Streets and Highways Code), and specifically Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 8330) thereof, to vacate a portion of North Parkway Drive and a pedestrian easement south of West Weldon Avenue; and WHEREAS, the State of California is requesting the vacation a portion of North Parkway Drive and a pedestrian easement south of West Weldon Avenue, as described in Exhibit "A", as shown on Exhibit "B" and detailed in Exhibit "C", which are attached and incorporated in this Resolution; and WHEREAS the purpose of the vacation is to eliminate excessive public street right of way and accommodate the development of the adjacent property; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Department, other City departments and utility agencies have reviewed this proposal and have approved the vacation with no conditions after determining that there are no public utility facilities and no public improvements within the area proposed for vacation as described in Exhibit "A", as shown on Exhibit "B" and detailed in Exhibit "C"; and WHEREAS, the Traffic and Engineering Services Division has further determined that the area proposed for vacation as shown on the attached Exhibits, which are attached and incorporated in this Resolution, is unnecessary for present or prospective 1 of 3 Date Adopted: Date Approved: Effective Date: _,. /),,44 aCity Attorney Approv�v \Resolution No. 2 of 3 public street or pedestrian purposes; and WHEREAS, this action is being taken pursuant to the provisions of the Public Streets, Highways, and Service Easements Vacation Law (Cal. Sts. & Hy. Code §§ 8300-8363). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Fresno as follows: 1. The Council finds from all the evidence submitted for the vacation a portion of North Parkway Drive and a pedestrian easement south of West Weldon Avenue, as described in Exhibit “A”, as shown on Exhibit “B” and detailed in Exhibit “C”, is unnecessary for present and prospective public street or pedestrian purposes purposes. 2. From and after the date this resolution is recorded, that portion a portion of North Parkway Drive and a pedestrian easement south of West Weldon Avenue , as shown on the attached Exhibits shall no longer constitute a public street and pedestrian easement. 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Resolution and shall file a certified copy, attested by the City Clerk under the seal of the City, in the Office of the City Clerk. 4. This vacation shall become effective on the date this resolution is recorded. ************************ 3 of 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF FRESNO ) ss. CITY OF FRESNO ) I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2020. AYES : NOES : ABSENT : ABSTAIN : Mayor Approval: , 2020 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2020 Mayor Veto: , 2020 Council Override Vote: , 2020 YVONNE SPENCE, MMC, CRM City Clerk BY: Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: DOUGLAS T. SLOAN City Attorney BY: Kristi Costa Date Deputy City Attorney Attachments: Exhibits “A” through “C” PW File No. 12149 EXHIBIT “A” Legal Description Proposed Street Vacation – a portion of N. Parkway Drive Page 1 of 2 That portion of North Parkway Drive in Section 30, Township 13 South, Range 20 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the South quarter-section corner of said Section 30, said corner marked by a found 5/8 inch rebar tagged “RCE12739 per Corner Record No. 1189 filed in the Fresno County Surveyor’s Office; THENCE (1) along the South line of the Southwest quarter of said Section 30, North 89°34’31” West, 352.71 feet; THENCE (2) leaving the South line of the Southwest quarter of said Section 30, South 0°25'29" West, 964.34 feet to a point on the southwesterly boundary of the land described in an Easement Deed to the City of Fresno, recorded March 29, 1990 as Document No. 90035130, Official Records of Fresno County, said point is the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING and the beginning of a non-tangent curve concave southwesterly, said curve has a radius of 482.61 feet, to which a radial line bears South 84°11'14" West; THENCE (3) northerly along said curve through a central angle of 15°43'00" an arc distance of 132.38 feet to a point on the southerly boundary of the land described in an Easement Deed to the City of Fresno, recorded March 29, 1990 as Document No. 90035131, Official Records of Fresno County; THENCE along said last Easement Deed the following three (3) courses: (4) South 68°28'12" West, 2.00 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent curve concave southwesterly, said curve has a radius of 480.61 feet, to which a radial line bears North 68°28'12" East; (5) northwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 4°46'12" an arc distance of 40.01 feet; (6) North 63°42'00" East, 2.00 feet to a point on said first Easement Deed, said point being the beginning of a non-tangent curve concave southwesterly, said curve has a radius of 482.61 feet, to which a radial line bears North 63°42'02" East; THENCE (7) northwesterly said curve through a central angle of 0°42'30" an arc distance of 5.97 feet; THENCE (8) along said first Easement Deed, North 27°00'28" West, 215.11 feet: THENCE (9) South 89°37'49" East, 16.70 feet to the beginning of a curve concave southwesterly, said curve has a radius of 68.00 feet; THENCE (10) southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 58°01'23" an arc distance of 68.86 feet; DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY CONTINUES ON NEXT PAGE EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description Proposed Street Vacation -a portion of N. Parkway Drive Page 2 of 2 THENCE (11) South 31 °36'26" East, 125.26 feet to the beginning of a curve concave westerly, said curve has a radius of 64.00 feet; THENCE (12) southerly along said curve through a central angle of 32°03'25" an arc distance of 35.81 feet; THENCE (13) South 0°27'00" West, 189.74 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; Containing 15, 128 square feet, more or less. The bearings and distances used in this description are on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Epoch 2007, Zone 4. Divide distances by 0.99993543 to obtain ground distances. This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyors Act. Signature ~~~ Professional Land Surveyor Expiration Date: December 31, 2020 Date April 27, 2020 NO SCALE N N 3 1^ 3 6'2 6"W 73.48N00^37'51"EL = 8 5. 6 6À = 4 3 ^ 3 9'' 2 6 "R = 1 1 2. 4 2 N32^16'0 6" E 1 2.21 N3 1^32'55"W13 8.35N00^37'03"EN 2 6 ^ 5 9' 3 8 " W 661.19N00^33'52"E1 3 8. 8 3 1 3 8. 8 5 N89^25'22"W 60.02114.37N00^37'03"E73.55 N89^36'15"W117.40P A R K WAY D RI V E 53.45N00^35'03"EN89^37'49"W127.33 7 2. 0 6 CITY OF FRESNO EXHIBIT B N89^34'31"W PER CR NO 1189 RCE 12739 FND 5/8 " rebar w tag S 1/4 COR. SEC. 30 1/4 SEC. LINE 352.70 16.70 N LAFAYETTE AVE30 93.99 46.50 N00^25'29"E 964.3430 N WOODSON AVEWELDON AVE R.S. BK 9 PG 38 HEIGHTS HIGHWAY LOT 28 T. 13 S., R. 20 E., M. D. M. SECTION 30 LOT 26 merritsB.DGN 4/27/2020 7:24:47 AM NO SCALE NN2 7 ^ 0 0' 2 8 "W16.70 N89^37'49"W N 31^36'26" W 125.26 2 1 5. 1 1 N 68^28'12" E Radial 1990, INSTRUMENT #90035131, F. C. R. PURPOSES RECORDED ON MARCH 29, OF FRESNO FOR PUBLIC WALKWAY 2 FOOT WIDE EASEMENT TO CITY N00^27'00"E 189.74L = 6 8. 8 6À = 5 8 ^ 0 1'' 2 3"R = 6 8. 0 0 L = 3 5. 8 1À = 3 2 ^ 0 3' 2 5 "R = 6 4. 0 0 2. 0 0 2. 0 0 #90035130, F. C. R. 1990, INSTRUMENT RECORDED ON MARCH 29, PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES TO CITY OF FRESNO FOR 3 FOOT WIDE EASEMENT RadialN 638^42'02" E L = 40.01 À = 4^46''12" R = 480.61 N 68^28'14" E Radial CITY OF FRESNO EXHIBIT C L = 132.38À = 15^43''00"R = 482.61L = 5.97 À = 0^42''30" R = 482.61 T. 13 S., R. 20 E., M. D. M. SECTION 30 R.S. BK 9 PG 38 HEIGHTS HIGHWAY LOT 28 P A R KWA Y DRI VE merritC.DGN 4/27/2020 7:42:30 AM City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00630 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department BY:AARON A. AGUIRRE, Public Works Manager Public Works Department, Landscape Maintenance Division SUBJECT Approve Contract Change Order No.1,increasing the contract amount by $119,500,from $197,376 to $316,876 for the Highway Litter Control Contract between the City of Fresno and Landscape Maintenance of America dba California Highway Adoption California Highway Adoption Co. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends City Council approve Contract Change Order No.1,in the amount of $119,500, with Landscape Maintenance of America dba California Highway Adoption California Highway Adoption Co for the Highway Litter Control. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On January 16,2020,City Council approved a contract with Landscape Maintenance of America dba California Highway Adoption Co.for $197,376 to provide monthly highway litter control along California State Routes 41,99,168 and 180 throughout City of Fresno (City)limits.The contract change order for $119,500 will increase litter control from (1)one time per month to (2)two times per month,for a total of (24)twenty-four times per year on Highway 41 and 99.These two highways are experiencing high volumes of litter and would benefit significantly from the extra two cycles per month.Funding is available through the freeway litter control program previously approved by the Council, which includes outside funding from Measure “C” and Caltrans District 6. BACKGROUND The City Council appropriated funds for Highway Litter Control on January 16,2020,to Maintenance of America dba California Highway Adoption Co.In the first month,the Highway Litter Control team picked up 865 bags of litter,equating to approximately 8.65 tons,along California State Routes 41, City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00630 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #: picked up 865 bags of litter,equating to approximately 8.65 tons,along California State Routes 41, 99, 168 and 180. Of the total 8.65 tons picked up in month one,5.84 tons or 68%of the litter came from California State Routes 41 and 99.As such,the increase in litter removal from (1)one time per month to (2)two times per month along Highway 41 and 99 will allow for garbage to be picked up more frequently, improving the health and safety and the appearance of our City. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines section 15378,this is not a project as defined by CEQA LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented because this change order is to an existing construction contract. FISCAL IMPACT This request will have no impact to the General Fund in the 2020 Fiscal year.All funding for the program will be available through the adopted FY2020 budget and Measure C Litter Abatement funds and Caltrans funding.Matching funds were made available from Community Sanitation Revenues in the adopted FY2020 budget. Attachment: Contract Change Order No. 1 City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00576 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-H REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:GREGORY A. BARFIELD, Director Department of Transportation BY:BRIAN BARR, Assistant Director Department of Transportation DUANE MYERS, Fleet Manager Department of Transportation/ Municipal Fleet Division CLIFF TRAUGH, Senior Management Analyst Department of Transportation/ Municipal Fleet Division SUBJECT Approve the award of a purchase contract to Ruckstell Sales of Fresno, California, for the purchase of one 520 Peterbilt rear-loading refuse truck in the amount of $304,900 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the award of a purchase contract to Ruckstell Sales of Fresno, California, for the purchase of one 520 Peterbilt rear-loading refuse truck in the amount of $304,900. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Solid Waste Management Division,under the Department of Public Utilities,wishes to purchase one 520 Peterbilt rear-loading refuse truck to replace a unit past its useful life.The new unit will be used by the Solid Waste Management Division to complete residential routes currently assigned to an older truck in need of replacement.The new truck will be Heil 27 yard Durapack 5000 body on a 520 Peterbilt chassis.This combination has proven to be reliable within the fleet and will continue to be the standard as the older and discontinued trucks are removed from service.The Department of Transportation recommends this purchase based on the age and mileage of the truck identified for replacement.The unit will be purchased through a competitively solicited cooperative procurement process administered by Sourcewell, formally the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA). BACKGROUND City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00576 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-H The Department of Public Utilities,Solid Waste Management Division,is responsible for sanitation programs such as Operation Clean-up,litter control,and FresGO for over 111,000 residential customers.Fifteen drivers service a 112 square mile area recycling discarded lumber,appliances, and various other large objects that would otherwise end up in a landfill.In 2019,Solid Waste Management removed over 25,400 tons of refuse from the city through these programs alone. To keep these operations moving forward,the Solid Waste Management Division operates 15 rear- loading refuse trucks throughout the city.The Fleet Management Division has identified the Heil bodied Peterbilt rear loading refuse truck as the preferred unit to perform these varied activities.Both Peterbilt and Heil have been in business for more than 75 years,and have local dealerships in Fresno to quickly support the fleet.The City of Fresno has been using Heil bodies in the fleet for 16 years,and has experienced success in the functionality and durability of this product.In 2015,the Peterbilt chassis was evaluated against other like products by Solid Waste Management,the Department of Transportation,and representatives of Local 39.The final determination is that the Peterbilt chassis is the superior product,and since 2015,Peterbilt units have continued to perform well in the fleet. The new 520 Peterbilt rear-loading refuse truck will continue to be powered by Liquid Natural Gas, which has proven to be both economical and environmentally conscious.The equipped L9N “Near Zero”engine produces only one-tenth of the allowable NOX greenhouse gas emissions and meets the latest EPA standards set in 2017 for this type of equipment. The rear-loading refuse trucks are on an eight-year or 120,000-mile replacement schedule,which has been established by the Fleet Management Division as the optimum replacement time.Currently, one unit has been identified for replacement as it is over this limit in both age and mileage. The equipment will be purchased utilizing competitively solicited cooperative procurement process administered by Sourcewell,formally the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA).The purchase price for this unit is $304,900.This price includes the Sourcewell discount applied to City purchases,as well as delivery and sales tax at 7.975 percent.The Purchasing Division has approved this contract and recommends Council to approve. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Section 15378, the award of this contract does not qualify as a project as defined by CEQA. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference is not applicable.The City is purchasing the Peterbilt rear-loading refuse truck through a cooperative purchase agreement. FISCAL IMPACT No general funds will be used to purchase this item.The funding to cover the purchase cost of the 520 Peterbilt rear-loading refuse truck has been included in the FY2020 adopted budget under the operations of the Solid Waste Management Division.The source of funding for this project is the City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00576 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-H Community Sanitation Fund, generated by the collection of customer user fees. Attachments: Board Resolutions Combined Ads Comment & Review Contract Evaluation Proposal Opening Record RFP City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Opportunity Notice Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Opportunity Information Organization:Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties Organization Address: Reference Number:AB-2019-04358 Solicitation Number: AB-2019-04358 Solicitation Type:Request for Proposal Posting (MM/dd/yyyy):07/11/2019 03:30:00 PM Alberta Time Closing (MM/dd/yyyy):09/12/2019 03:30:59 PM Alberta Time Last Update (MM/dd/yyyy): 07/11/2019 03:01:31 PM Alberta Time Agreement Type:NWPTA/TILMA & CFTA & CETA Region of Opportunity:Open Region of Delivery:Alberta Opportunity Type:Open & Competitive Commodity Codes: N4540A: Garbage Disposal Units N4540: Waste Disposal Equipment N2320DJA: Truck, Refuse Collection, Diesel, to 27,499 GVWR N2320GJ: Truck, Refuse Collection, Gasoline Powered N2320DJB: Truck, Refuse Collection, diesel, 27,500 GVWR and Up Category: Goods This opportunity is now closed. APC "Opportunity Notices" This notice is provided for information purposes only. Refer to the "Opportunity Documents" in the bid package for authoritative information. All queries pertaining to the language, content or any missing or inaccurate information within this abstract must be sent to its originator of the abstract, as specified in the opportunity notice. © APC - All rights reserved. No part of the information contained in this Web Site may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior written permission of the Manager, Centre of Expertise via: SA.APCRequests@gov.ab.ca. Her Majesty the Queen in right of Alberta and the Alberta public sector entities that use APC are not responsible or liable for the accuracy of the information contained in the publication. It is the responsibility of interested parties to review the opportunity posting for changes or updates prior to the opportunity closing date/time. Page 1 of 1Opportunity Preview 11/14/2019http://vendor.purchasingconnection.ca/Opportunity.aspx?Guid=864027BF-9B97-477B-A... 6 C ❚THURSDAY, JULY 11, 2019 ❚USA TODAY E2 SPORTS SPORTS ON TV Times p.m. Eastern unless noted. Check local listings. AUTO RACING:NASCAR Gander Outdoors Truck Se- ries: qualifying (FS1, 4); NASCAR Gander Outdoors Truck Series: The Buckle Up in Your Truck 225 (FS1, 7:30); CYCLING:Tour de France: Stage 6, 98 miles, Mulhouse to La Planche des Belles Filles, France (NBCSN, 7:30 a.m.) GOLF:European Tour Golf: The Scottish Open, first round (Golf, 5:30 a.m.); European Tour Golf: The Scot- tish Open, first round (Golf, 9:30 a.m.); PGA Tour Champions Golf: Senior Players Championship, first round (Golf, 1:30); PGA Tour Golf: The John Deere Classic, first round (Golf, 4); LPGA Tour Golf: The Mar- athon Classic, first round (Golf, 7:30) HIGH SCHOOL BASEBALL: GEICO City Series: Teams TBD, third-place game (ESPNU, 3); GEICO City Series: Teams TBD, championship game (ESPNU, 6) MIXED MARTIAL ARTS:Professional Fighters League: women’s lightweights and men’s welterweights (ESPN2, 8:30) MLB:Houston at Texas (ESPN, 8) NBA:Summer League: Toronto vs. Indiana (NBA, 6); Summer League: Washington vs. Atlanta (ESPN2, 6:30); Summer League: Portland vs. Oklahoma City (NBA, 8); Summer League: Houston vs. Utah (ESPNU, 8:30); Summer League: Sacramento vs. LA Clippers (NBA, 10); Summer League: Memphis vs. Boston (ESPN2, 10:30) TENNIS: Wimbledon: E. Svitolina vs. S. Halep and S. Williams vs. B. Strýcová, Ladies’ Semifinals (ESPN, 8 a.m.) FOR THE RECORD All times ET MLB East Division W L Pct GBNew York 57 31 .648 —Tampa Bay 52 39 .571 61⁄2Boston4941.544 9Toronto3457.374 241⁄2Baltimore2762.303 301⁄2 Central Division W L Pct GBMinnesota5633.629 —Cleveland 50 38 .568 51⁄2Chicago4244.488 121⁄2Kansas City 30 61 .330 27Detroit2857.329 26 West Division W L Pct GBHouston5733.633 —Oakland 50 41 .549 71⁄2Texas4842.533 9Los Angeles 45 46 .495 121⁄2Seattle3955.415 20 Tuesday American League 4, National League 3Wednesday No games scheduledThursday Houston at Texas, 8:05 p.m.National LeagueEast Division W L Pct GBAtlanta5437.593 —Washington 47 42 .528 6Philadelphia4743.522 61⁄2New York 40 50 .444 131⁄2Miami3355.375 191⁄2 Central Division W L Pct GBChicago4743.522 —Milwaukee 47 44 .516 1⁄2St. Louis 44 44 .500 2Pittsburgh4445.494 21⁄2Cincinnati4146.471 41⁄2 West Division W L Pct GBLos Angeles 60 32 .652 —Arizona 46 45 .505 131⁄2San Diego 45 45 .500 14Colorado4445.494 141⁄2San Francisco 41 48 .461 171⁄2 Tuesday American League 4, National League 3Wednesday No games scheduledThursday No games scheduledTuesdayAmerican League 4, NationalLeague 3 NL AB R H BI BB SO Avg. Yelich lf 2 0 0 0 0 1 .000 Bryant lf 1 0 0 0 0 1 .000 McNeil lf 1 0 0 0 0 0 .000 Baez ss 2 0 0 0 0 1 .000 Story ss 1 0 0 0 0 1 .000 DeJong ss 0 0 0 0 1 0 .258 Freeman 1b 1 0 0 0 1 1 .000 Blackmon rf 2 1 1 1 0 1 .500 Bellinger rf 2 0 0 0 0 2 .000 Alonso 1b 2 0 1 2 0 1 .500 Arenado 3b 2 0 0 0 0 0 .000 Moustakas 3b 2 0 0 0 0 0 .000 Bell dh 2 0 1 0 0 0 .500 d-Realmuto ph-dh 2 0 0 0 0 1 .000 Contreras c 2 0 0 0 0 1 .000 Muncy 2b 2 0 0 0 0 1 .000 Marte 2b 2 0 1 0 0 1 .500 Grandal c 1 1 0 0 1 1 .000 Acuna Jr. cf 2 0 0 0 0 2 .000 Dahl cf 1 1 1 0 0 0 1.000Totals32353316 AL AB R H BI BB SO Avg. Springer rf 2 0 1 0 0 1 .500 a-Lindor ph-ss 2 0 0 0 0 1 .000 LeMahieu 2b 2 0 0 0 0 0 .000 b-Torres ph-2b 2 0 1 0 0 1 .500 Trout cf 2 0 0 0 0 0 .000 Merrifield cf 2 0 0 0 0 1 .000 Santana 1b 3 0 0 0 0 1 .000 Abreu 1b 1 0 0 0 0 0 .000 Martinez dh 2 0 0 0 0 1 .000 c-Vogelbachph-dh 1 0 0 0 0 0 .000 Bregman 3b 2 1 1 0 0 0 .500 M.Chapman 3b 0 1 0 0 1 0 .265 Sanchez c 2 1 1 0 0 0 .500 McCann c 1 0 1 0 0 0 1.000Brantley lf 1 0 1 1 0 0 1.000Meadows lf-rf 1 0 0 0 0 0 .000 e-Bogaerts ph 1 0 0 0 0 0 .000 Betts rf 0 0 0 0 0 0 .272 Polanco ss 2 0 1 1 0 1 .500 Gallo lf 1 1 1 1 0 0 1.000Totals3048317 NL 000 001 020 —3 5 0 AL 010 010 20x —4 8 0 a-struck out for Springer in the 5th. b-struckout for LeMahieu in the 5th. c-flied out forMartinez in the 6th. d-popped out for Bell inthe 7th. e-grounded out for Meadows in the7th.LOB—NL 5, AL 3. 2B—Marte, Sanchez, Brantley.HR—Blackmon, off Hendriks; Gallo, off Smith.RBIs—Alonso 2, Blackmon, Brantley, Polanco,Gallo. SB—Alonso, DeJong.Runners left in scoring position—NL 4 (Baez,Bell, Moustakas 2); AL 2 (Santana, Polanco).RISP—NL 1 for 8; AL 1 for 6.Runners moved up—Arenado, LeMahieu,Trout, Meadows, Bogaerts. GIDP—Abreu, Bo-gaerts.DP—NL 2 (DeJong, Muncy, Alonso), (DeJong,Muncy, Alonso). NL IP H R ER BB SO NP ERA Ryu 1 1 0 0 0 0 12 0.00 Kershaw, L 1 2 1 1 0 1 16 9.00 deGrom 1 0 0 0 0 1 7 0.00 Castillo 1 0 0 0 0 2 15 0.00 Buehler 1 2 1 1 0 2 19 9.00 Soroka 1 0 0 0 0 0 10 0.00 Woodruff 2⁄3 1 1 1 1 0 12 13.50 Smith 1⁄3 1 1 1 0 0 3 27.00 Alcantara 1 1 0 0 0 1 10 0.00 AL IP H R ER BB SO NP ERA Verlander 1 0 0 0 0 2 14 0.00 Tanaka, W 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 0.00 Berrios, H, 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 13 0.00 Giolito, H, 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 13 0.00 Bieber, H, 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 19 0.00 Hendriks, H, 7 1 1 1 1 0 3 19 9.00 Greene, H, 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 12 0.00 Hand, H, 0 1 2 2 2 2 1 33 18.00 A.Chapman, S 1 0 0 0 0 3 12 0.00 Umpires—Home, Mark Wegner; First, BrianO’Nora; Second, Phil Cuzzi; Third, Tim Tim-mons; Right, Jordan Baker; Left, D.J. Reyburn.T—2:48. A—36,747 (35,225). TOUR DE FRANCE WednesdayColmar, FranceFifth Stage A 175.5-kilometer (109-mile) hilly ride nearthe German border from Saint-Dié-des-Vosges to Colmar, with a pair of Category 2climbs sandwiched by a pair of Category 3s.1. Peter Sagan, Slovakia, Bora-Hansgrohe,4:02:33.2. Wout Van Aert, Belgium, Jumbo-Visma,same time.3. Matteo Trentin, Italy, Mitchelton-Scott,same time.4. Sonny Colbrelli, Italy, Bahrain-Merida,same time.5. Greg Van Avermaet, Belgium, CCC, sametime.6. Julien Simon, France, Cofidis, same time.7. Michael Matthews, Australia, Sunweb, sametime.8. Nils Politt, Germany, Katusha Alpecin, sametime.9. Jasper Stuyven, Belgium, Trek-Segafredo,same time.10. Julian Alaphilippe, France, Deceuninck-QuickStep, same time.11. Xandro Meurisse, Belgium, Wanty-Gobert,same time.12. Edvald Boasson Hagen, Norway, Dimen-sion Data, same time.13. Alberto Bettiol, Italy, EF Education First,same time.14. Guillaume Martin, France, Wanty-Gobert,same time. 15. Alexey Lutsenko, Kazakhstan, Astana,same time.16. Omar Fraile, Spain, Astana, same time.17. Fabio Felline, Italy, Trek-Segafredo, sametime.18. David Gaudu, France, Groupama-FDJ,same time.19. Warren Barguil, France, Arkea-Samsic,same time.20. Daryl Impey, South Africa, Mitchelton-Scott, same time.Overall Standings(After five stages)1. Julian Alaphilippe, France, Deceuninck-QuickStep, 18:44:12.2. Wout Van Aert, Belgium, Jumbo-Visma, :14.3. Steven Kruijswijk, Netherlands, Jumbo-Vis-ma, :25.4. George Bennett, New Zealand, Jumbo-Vis-ma, same time.5. Michael Matthews, Australia, Sunweb, :40.6. Egan Bernal, Colombia, Ineos, same time.7. Geraint Thomas, Britain, Ineos, :45.8. Enric Mas, Spain, Deceuninck-QuickStep,:46.9. Peter Sagan, Slovakia, Bora-Hansgrohe,:50.10. Greg Van Avermaet, Belgium, CCC, :51.11. Michael Woods, Canada, EF EducationFirst, same time.12. Wilco Kelderman, Netherlands, Sunweb,same time.13. Thibaut Pinot, France, Groupama-FDJ, :52.14. Rigoberto Urán, Colombia, EF EducationFirst, :53.15. Tejay Van Garderen, United States, EF Edu-cation First, same time.16. Sonny Colbrelli, Italy, Bahrain-Merida, :56.17. Matteo Trentin, Italy, Mitchelton-Scott, :57.18. David Gaudu, France, Groupama-FDJ,same time.19. Rudy Molard, France, Groupama-FDJ,same time.20. Nicolas Roche, Ireland, Sunweb, 1:00. SOCCER National Women’s Soccer LeagueW L T Pts GF GA Reign FC 5 1 5 20 12 9 North Carolina 5 2 4 19 24 12 Portland 5 2 4 19 19 13 Washington 5 3 3 18 17 11 Utah 5 3 2 17 8 7 Chicago 4 5 2 14 17 18 Houston 3 4 4 13 13 18 Orlando 2 8 2 8 12 27 Sky Blue FC 1 7 2 5 8 15 FridayUtah at Sky Blue FC, 7:30 p.m.SaturdayReign FC at North Carolina, 7 p.m.Chicago at Houston, 8:30 p.m.SundayOrlando at Portland, 3 p.m.MLSEASTERN CONFERENCE W L T Pts GF GAPhiladelphia1056363928D.C. United 8 5 7 31 25 21Atlanta973302723Montreal993302634NY City FC 7 2 8 29 30 20New York 8 7 4 28 33 27Toronto FC 6 8 5 23 30 33New England 6 8 5 23 22 36Orlando City 6 9 4 22 27 27Chicago587223129Columbus5132171730Cincinnati4132141844 WESTERN CONFERENCEWLTPts GF GALos Angeles 13 2 4 43 50 16LA Galaxy 11 7 1 34 26 22Seattle955322925Minnesota 9 7 3 30 36 29FC Dallas 8 7 5 29 29 25San Jose 8 7 4 28 30 30Houston873272825Real Salt Lake 8 9 2 26 25 29Portland782232628Sporting KC 5 7 7 22 29 34Vancouver488202231Colorado5104192938 Friday New England at D.C. United, 7 p.m.Los Angeles FC at Houston, 9 p.m.San Jose at LA Galaxy, 11 p.m. WNBA EASTERN CONFERENCEWL Pct GBWashington95.643 —Connecticut 9 6 .600 1⁄2Chicago77.500 2New York 7 8 .467 21⁄2Indiana610.375 4Atlanta410.286 5 WESTERN CONFERENCEWL Pct GBLas Vegas 10 5 .667 —Minnesota 8 6 .571 11⁄2Phoenix76.538 2Los Angeles 7 7 .500 21⁄2Seattle88.500 21⁄2Dallas59.357 41⁄2 Tuesday Dallas 74, Los Angeles 62Wednesday Atlanta 78, Connecticut 75Phoenix 91, Washington 68Las Vegas 74, Indiana 71Minnesota at Chicago, lateFriday Los Angeles at Indiana, 7 p.m.Minnesota at Atlanta, 7:30 p.m.Phoenix at Connecticut, 8 p.m.New York at Chicago, 8 p.m.Dallas at Seattle, 10 p.m. TENNIS Wimbledon Results LONDON – Results Wednesday from Wimble-don at The All England Lawn Tennis & CroquetClub (seedings in parentheses):Men’s Singles Quarterfinals Novak Djokovic (1), Serbia, def. David Goffin(21), Belgium, 6-4, 6-0, 6-2.Roberto Bautista Agut (23), Spain, def. GuidoPella (26), Argentina, 7-5, 6-4, 3-6, 6-3.Rafael Nadal (3), Spain, def. Sam Querrey,United States, 7-5, 6-2, 6-2.Roger Federer (2), Switzerland, def. Kei Nishi-kori (8), Japan, 4-6, 6-1, 6-4, 6-4.Men’s Doubles Quarterfinals Raven Klaasen, South Africa, and MichaelVenus (3), New Zealand, def. Henri Kontinen,Finland, and John Peers (8), Australia, 4-6,6-3, 6-7 (5), 6-4, 6-3.Women’s Doubles Third Round Danielle Collins and Bethanie Mattek-Sands ,United States, def. Victoria Azarenka, Belarus,and Ash Barty (10), Australia, walkover.Quarterfinal Hsieh Su-wei, Taiwan, and Barbora Strycova(3), Czech Republic, def. Elise Mertens, Bel-gium, and Aryna Sabalenka (6), Belarus, 6-4,6-2.Gabriela Dabrowski, Canada, and Xu Yifan (4),China, def. Bethanie Mattek-Sands and Dan-ielle Collins, United States, 6-1, 6-3.Barbora Krejcikova and Katerina Siniakova(2), Czech Republic, def. Anna-Lena Groene-feld, Germany, and Demi Schuurs (8), Nether-lands, 6-2, 7-6 (1).Mixed Doubles Third Round Bruno Soares, Brazil, and Nicole Melichar (1),United States, def. Andy Murray, Britain, andSerena Williams, United States, 6-3, 4-6, 6-2.Matwe Middelkoop, Netherlands, and YangZhaoxuan, China, def. Marcus Daniell, NewZealand, and Jennifer Brady, United States,6-2, 6-7 (5), 6-4.Wesley Koolhof, Netherlands, and KvetaPeschke (5), Czech Republic, def. Aisam-ul-Haq Qureshi, Pakistan, and Nadiia Kichenok,Ukraine, 7-6 (5), 6-4.Artem Sitak, New Zealand, and Laura Siege-mund, Germany, def. Mate Pavic, Croatia, andGabriela Dabrowski (3), Canada, 5-7, 7-6 (5),13-12 (5).Ivan Dodig, Croatia, and Latisha Chan (8), Tai-wan, def. Edouard Roger-Vasselin, France,and Andreja Klepac (11), Slovenia, 2-6, 6-3,6-4. AUTO RACING NASCAR Monster Energy CupPoints Leaders1. Joey Logano, 700 2. Kyle Busch, 682 3. Kevin Harvick, 625 4. Brad Keselowski, 613 5. Martin Truex Jr., 597 6. Denny Hamlin, 588 7. Chase Elliott, 585 8. Kurt Busch, 564 9. Alex Bowman, 534 10. Aric Almirola, 512 11. Ryan Blaney, 508 12. William Byron, 498 13. Jimmie Johnson, 474 14. Kyle Larson, 473 15. Clint Bowyer, 444 16. Ryan Newman, 443 17. Daniel Suarez, 440 18. Erik Jones, 430 19. Ricky Stenhouse Jr., 39820. Paul Menard, 390 IndyCar Points LeadersThrough June 231. Josef Newgarden, 4022. Alexander Rossi, 3953. Simon Pagenaud, 3414. Scott Dixon, 3085. Takuma Sato, 2926. Will Power, 2947. Ryan Hunter-Reay, 2718. Graham Rahal, 2449. James Hinchcliffe, 21610. Felix Rosenqvist, 20911. Sebastien Bourdais, 208 12. Santino Ferrucci, 20413. Spencer Pigot, 19414. Colton Herta, 18315. Marcus Ericsson, 18316. Marco Andretti, 17417. Tony Kanaan, 15618. Zach Veach, 15319. Ed Jones, 15220. Matheus Leist, 145 DEALS BASEBALL American LeagueHOUSTON ASTROS — Sent RHP Joe Smith toCorpus Christi (PCL) for a rehab assignment.OAKLAND ATHLETICS — Sent RHP Jharel Cot-ton to Stockton (Cal) for a rehab assignment.SEATTLE MARINERS — Signed RHPs MichaelLimoncelli, Anthony Tomczak and Dutch Lan-dis to minor league contracts.National LeagueCINCINNATI REDS — Optioned INF/OF JoshVanMeter to Louisville (IL).LOS ANGELES DODGERS — Optioned 1B MattBeaty to Oklahoma City (PCL). Reinstated SSCorey Seager from the 10-day IL.ST. LOUIS CARDINALS — Signed OF TommyJew to a minor league contract. Advertise in USA TODAY! (800) 397-0070 sales@russelljohns.com SET YOUR APART. Advertise with USA TODAY! 800-397-0070 BRAND To view more Classified listings, visit: www.classifieds.usatoday.com BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES MARKETPLACE MARKETPLACE MARKETPLACE LOOKING FOR A NEW OPPORTUNITY? We need former biz owners, former executives or professionals adding on to their practices. Since 1991 we have been putting high end individuals into lucrative consulting practices. Start up capital required! Call: 877-826-2998 or email us at consultbbb@gmail.com Make 20% in 12 months secured by real estate Company that invented the shoes that charge your phone, generator powered by wind & sun as well as 60 other inventions is looking for a 12 month loan.Will pay 20% interest & pledge real estate as security. Phone or text: ingeniousproducts4@gmail.com Looking for New Drivers for upcoming launch of a new ride share company June 15th. Keep 100% fares, tips and cancellation fees. Must be 21, have your own car/insurance. Sign up is free. www.cheaprideshares.com 2 Bd 2 Bath House For Sale FSBO in North Phoenix AZ. $280,000! Furnished w/New AC & Appliances! Parks, Shopping & Schools Nearby! Call 602-494-6316 REAL ESTATE HOMES / SOUTHWEST PUBLIC NOTICE INVENTIONS / PATENTS FIRESTOP Help us stop Paradise from happening again! FIRESTOP seen on Denver TV & Denver Post 5 years ago! Need Help! Ron Howard doing movie “PARADISE” Know him, Ellen or Oprah Tell them we’re here! Text me your email, and I’ll send you to a website! 970-388-6117 BOOKS/PUBLICATIONS STUDY THE BIBLE For FREE 8-lesson course Church of Christ, Box 8453, Falls Church, VA 22041 888-949-2176 www.gracewords.org BUSINESS SERVICES Custom Lifesize Statues! Secular, Sports, Religious, ETC. DeliveryIn120Days! PricesStartAt$8,500 www.CaveCo.us caveco33@aol.com Call CAVEMAN 1-800-989-CAVE (2283) REAL ESTATE RANCHES/FARM 877-475-6141 www.TheDiamondB.com The Interlocal Purchasing System (TIPS)posted procurement solicitations at www.tips-usa.com for the following categories: 190701 Web Hosting, Services or Content Management 190702 Temporary Flood Barriers 190703 Video and Audio Equipment, Presentation Systems, Production and other Services Proposals are due and will be opened on August 16, 2019, at 3:00 pm local time. Awards are tentatively scheduled for September 26, 2019 by the Region 8 ESC Board, 4845 US Highway 271 North, Pittsburg, Texas 75686. Call 866-839-8477 for problems with website or questions. NOTICES PUBLIC NOTICE LEGAL NOTICE Sourcewell, a State of Minnesota local government agency and service cooperative, is requesting proposals for Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services to result in a national contracting solution for use by its members. Sourcewell members include thousands of governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and other public agencies located in the United States and Canada. A full copy of the Request for Proposals can be found on the Sourcewell Procurement Portal https://proportal.sourcewell-mn.gov. Only proposals submitted through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal will be considered. Proposals are due no later than September 12, 2019, at 4:30 p.m. CentralTime, and late proposals will not be considered. BUSINESS BANK SERVICES 15 Year Old Subprime Auto Lender Looking to Replace Senior Bank Lenders $25 Million Line of Credit Call and/or Text 706-414-6194 ATTN: MEDICARE RECIPIENTS Do you have chronic Knee or Back Pain? You may qualify for a FREE Knee or Back Brace. Call NOW! For a safe, drug free remedy. Get a pain-relieving back or knee brace at little or no cost to you. National Knee & Back Brace Center! 800-745-1594 HEALTH / FITNESS HEALTH / FITNESS AIRLINE TICKETS TRAVEL IN SEARCH OF IN SEARCH OF YOU MUST CALL US NOW: 800-804-8248 INVOKANA MEDICATION WARNING ATTENTION THIS IS AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE FOR ANYONE THAT HAS TAKEN THE PRESCRIPTION MEDICATION INVOKANA, INVOKOMED OR INVOKOMED XR FOR THEIR DIABETES. IN MAY 2017, BASED ON THE FACTS OF TWO CLINICAL TRIALS, THE FDA ISSUED A HEALTH ADVISORY WARNING THAT THESE DIABETES MEDICATIONS INCREASE THE RISK OF AMPUTATION OF THE LEGS AND TOES. IFYOU ORYOUR LOVED ONE HAVE TAKEN THE PRESCRIPTION MEDICATION INVOKANA, INVOKOMED OR INVOKOMED XR FORYOUR DIABETES. Attention Diabetics! NO More Finger Pricking GetYour New GCM Devices Covered by Medicare (must test/inject 4+ x a day) 855-629-5927 AUTO AUTO SERVICES Special Alert to Auto Owners Does your vehicle have less than 200,000 miles, with an auto warranty about to expire or no war- ranty coverage at all? You can pay NOTHING for repairs, as well as receive free towing, free car rental and free roadside assistance Call now for a free quote! 800-339-8193 FINANCIAL DROWNING IN CREDIT CARD DEBT? Struggling to make minimum payments Owe $10,000 or more? Call for our debt reset program! CALL TODAY: 800-478-7009 New Tax Laws! Pay Lower Taxes! *Guaranteed if you qualify Owe 10k+ to the IRS? Got Unfiled Returns? Call The Tax Doctor 800-847-9607 To advertise, call:1-800-397-0070 In Re: Flipdaddy’s, LLC Case No. 1:18-14408 United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Ohio Western Division NOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDER APPROVING THE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT OF FLIPDADDY’S, LCC ON JUNE 26, 2019 INCLUDING RIGHTS OFFERING PROCEDURES AND RELATED MATERIALS. (Doc. No. 130) (“THE OFFER”) The Offer and Rights Offering includes the ability of any current member or the general public to acquire a new membership interest in exchange for any previously issued membership interests or for any individual or entity to acquire what would be a pro rata share and voting interest of up to twenty five percent (25%) of the newly issued membership interests in Flipdaddy’s, LLC, the Reorganized Debtor. The Offer is subject to the Procedures set forth in the Rights Offering, Related Letter of Transmittal, together with any amendments, supplements and additional materials making up the Rights Offering Materials. Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any State Securities Commission has approved or disapproved of the Membership Interests to be issued as consideration for the Offer or passed on the adequacy of accuracy of the materials and information underlying the Offer and the Disclosure Statement. If you have further interest and wish to acquire further information, please contact: Steven L. Diller Diller & Rice, LLC 124 E. Main Street, Van Wert, Ohio 45891 Telephone: (419) 238-5025 Facsimile: (419) 238-4705 e-mail: steven@drlawllc.com 800-509-1635 FORECLOSURE DEFENSE HELPLINE AREYOU BEHIND ONYOUR MORTGAGE PAYMENTS? COULDYOUR HOUSE GO INTO FORECLOSURE? DOES IT SEEM LIKE THE BANK HAS NO INTEREST IN HELPINGYOU SAVEYOUR HOME ANDYOU FEEL LIKEYOU HAVE NOWHERE TO TURN? THE FORECLOSURE DEFENSE HELPLINE CAN HELP SAVEYOUR HOME. IT’S CRITICAL THAT YOU CALL US RIGHT NOW AT: Call to see if you qualify NOW: 800-208-3526 (24hrs) TALCUM POWDER WARNING Users of Johnson and Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower may be at a higher risk of developing ovarian cancer. If you or a loved one used talcum powder and were diagnosed with ovarian cancer, you may be entitled to financial compensation. Have you needed revision surgery? Have you experienced chronic pain, infection, or other complications? If so, you could be owed a significant cash settlement. Call for a free consultation today. 800-478-7176 IVC FILTER WARNING THE FDA HAS ISSUED A WARNING TO ALL IVC FILTER PATIENTS. THESE IVC FILTERS MAY CAUSE SERIOUS INJURIES. IF YOU OR YOUR LOVED ONE HAD AN IVC FILTER IMPLANTED YOU MAY BE ENTILTED TO FINANCIAL COMPENSTATION THERE ARE NO FEES UNLESS YOU GET A SETTLEMENT CALL NOW FOR A FREE LEGAL CONSULTATION Call now: 800-340-1530 (24/7) CALL: 800-509-9315 (24hrs) HIGH RISK DRIVER AUTO INSURANCE Have you been classified as a high risk driver due to DUI, DWI or tickets for aggressive driving and are required to get expensive and hard to find SR-22 auto insurance. The call and quote are free! CALL 24/7 FOR FREE PICKUP 800 448 1964 DONATE ANY CAR OR TRUCK ANY CONDITION GET AN IRS DEDUCTION AND FIGHT BREAST CANCER BREAK YOUR DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROBLEM TODAY Before it’s too late. Insurance may cover the cost.With the FMLA you can take off work! Call 24/7 to talk. 800-430-4149 Airline Tickets Deep Discounts Domestic – International – First Class Save up to 75% off Retail Prices Call 24/7 and Save 800-448-0828 Get Out ofYour Timeshare Contract Permanently 800-955-0426 Stop the Payments and Maintenance Fees Guaranteed / No More Timeshare Payments NOTICES PUBLIC NOTICE ALYSSA GILES MISSING From:Lakeland, FL 1-800-THE-LOST Sex:Female Race:White Hair: Auburn Eyes:Hazel DOB: May 26, 2001 Missing: Sep 16, 2018 Age Now:18 NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING & EXPLOITED CHILDREN Successful Advertisements start with USA TODAY Classifieds 1-800-397-0070 COMMENT AND REVIEW to the REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) #091219 Entitled Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services The following advertisement was placed July 11, 2019 in Utah’s The Salt Lake Tribune, in USA Today, in South Carolina’s The State, and on the Sourcewell website www.sourcewell-mn.gov, Sourcewell Procurement Portal https://proportal.sourcewell-mn.gov, Biddingo, Merx, The New York State Contract Reporter www.nyscr.ny.gov, PublicPurchase.com, and July 12, 2019 in Oregon’s Daily Journal of Commerce: Sourcewell, a State of Minnesota local government agency and service cooperative, is requesting proposals for Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services to result in a national contracting solution for use by its members. Sourcewell members include thousands of governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and other public agencies located in the United States and Canada. A full copy of the Request for Proposals can be found on the Sourcewell Procurement Portal [https://proportal.sourcewell-mn.gov]. Only proposals submitted through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal will be considered. Proposals are due no later than September 12, 2019, at 4:30 p.m. Central Time, and late proposals will not be considered. The solicitation process was conducted through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal. The following parties expressed interest in the solicitation by registering for this opportunity within the portal: A-1 Alternative Fuel Systems Labrie Enviroquip Group Amrep Manufacturing, LLC. MARREL CORPORATION Apex Equipment Sales, INC McNeilus Financial, Inc. Autocar Truck, LLC Nexgen Municipal Inc. Blankenship Equipment Repair, Inc. Norlift, Inc. Curbtender, Inc. Par-Kan Company, LLC Diamond International Trucks Ltd. Premier Truck Sales & Rental, Inc Diehl and Sons INC DBA New York Freightliner Scranton Manufacturing Co.< Inc. FST Canada Inc. o/a Joe Johnson Equipment The Heil Co. Gladstein, Neandross & Associates Universal Handling Equipment Company Ltd. Hol-Mac Corporation Valor Holdings LLC Hunter Truck Buffalo Wastequip Manufacturing Company LLC KBG Holdings, Inc Wilkens Industries Inc. Proposals were opened on September 12, 2019, on the Sourcewell Procurement Portal from the following: Amrep Manufacturing, LLC. Curbtender, Inc. DocuSign Envelope ID: FD9FA114-1D6C-4687-BFD7-89C419586D6D Sourcewell Page 2 of 4 Hol-Mac Corporation Labrie Enviroquip Group McNeilus Financial, Inc. Par-Kan Company, LLC Scranton Manufacturing Co. Inc. The Heil Co. Universal Handling Equipment Company Ltd. Proposals were reviewed by the Proposal Evaluation Committee: Kim Austin, CPPB, Sourcewell Procurement Lead Analyst Brandon Town, CPSM, CPSD, Sourcewell Procurement Analyst Craig West, Sourcewell Procurement Analyst Stephanie Haataja, CPIM, Sourcewell Procurement Analyst The findings of the Proposal Evaluation Committee are summarized as follows: The Proposal Evaluation Committee used the Sourcewell RFP evaluation criteria and determined that all proposal responses met Level-One and Level-Two Responsiveness and were evaluated. Curbtender, Inc. offers turnkey solutions for front end loaders, rear loaders and side loaders ranging in capacity from 6 cubic yards to 44 cubic yards including a non-CDL operator option. Their expansive dealer network and sales force stand ready to assist Members throughout the US and Canada. They are offering Sourcewell Members competitive discounts off MSRP, and a two-year standard warranty with extended warranty options available. Labrie Enviroquip Group manufactures rear-loading, side-loading and front-loading refuse bodies that can be attached to numerous chassis options. Labrie Enviroquip Group offers a side-loading body with a dual sided loading option that is suited for alleys and one-way streets. With regional sales managers and dealers located throughout the United States and Canada, Labrie Enviroquip Group is poised to assist Sourcewell Members. They are offering a solid discount off the published price for Members. McNeilus Financial, Inc. offers turnkey front load, rear load, and side load mobile refuse vehicles, along with parts and service. McNeilus Financial, Inc. utilizes a direct sales force throughout the United States and Canada to meet Sourcewell Member needs. Their pricing reflects a substantial discount from MSRP pricing, with volume discounts and leasing options available. Scranton Manufacturing Co. Inc. d/b/a New Way Trucks offers a turnkey solution for front loaders, rear loaders, side loaders and automated side loaders. They also offer Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fueling integration on all models for cleaner emissions. New Way Trucks has also been involved in developing battery electric rear load collection vehicles. They are positioned to serve Sourcewell Members in the United States and Canada with their extensive sales and dealer network. New Way Trucks is offering a competitive discount off MSRP price to Members. The Heil Co. offers turnkey solutions for mobile refuse vehicles, including front loaders, side loaders and rear loaders. The Heil Co. also offers Third Eye on-board camera system to monitor the driver’s environment and promote safe DocuSign Envelope ID: FD9FA114-1D6C-4687-BFD7-89C419586D6D Sourcewell Page 3 of 4 vehicle operation. They have a vast dealer network located throughout the United States and Canada and are equipped to serve Sourcewell Members. The Heil Co. offers Members a competitive discount off the MSRP price. For these reasons, the Sourcewell Proposal Review Committee recommends award of Sourcewell Contract #091219 to: Curbtender, Inc. 091219-CRB Labrie Enviroquip Group 091219-LEG McNeilus Financial, Inc. 091219-MCN Scranton Manufacturing Co. Inc. 091219-NWY The Heil Co. 091219-THC The preceding recommendations were approved on November 11, 2019. ______________________________________________ Kim Austin, CPPB, Sourcewell Procurement Lead Analyst _________________________________________________ Stephanie Haataja, CPIM, Sourcewell Procurement Analyst _______________________________________ Craig West, Sourcewell Procurement Analyst _____________________________________________________ Brandon Town, CPSM, CPSD, Sourcewell Procurement Analyst DocuSign Envelope ID: FD9FA114-1D6C-4687-BFD7-89C419586D6D Sourcewell Page 4 of 4 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE As Chief Procurement Officer for Sourcewell, I have reviewed the recommendation of the Evaluation Committee and the accompanying support materials documenting the process followed for RFP #091219 for Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services. The committee accepted, deemed responsive, evaluated, and recommended proposals for award. Under authority granted to the Chief Procurement Officer in Sourcewell’s bylaws, the recommendations set forth above are approved. I hereby certify: 1. Sourcewell is a government agency, created and authorized by Minnesota law to provide cooperative procurement contracts. 2. The procurement process and resulting contracts have been awarded in compliance with the laws of the State of Minnesota (Minnesota Statutes Chapter 471 and Minnesota Statutes Section 123A.21), and in conformity to Sourcewell’s Procurement Policy. Jeremy Schwartz, ASQ CSSBB Chief Procurement Officer DocuSign Envelope ID: FD9FA114-1D6C-4687-BFD7-89C419586D6D DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC Solicitation Number: RFP#091219 CONTRACT This Contract is between Sourcewell, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479 (Sourcewell) and The Heil Co., 2030 Hamilton Place Blvd. #200, Chattanooga, TN 37421 (Vendor). Sourcewell is a State of Minnesota local government agency and service cooperative created under the laws of the State of Minnesota (Minnesota Statutes Section 123A.21) that offers cooperative procurement solutions to its members. Participation is open to all levels of governmental entity, higher education, K-12 education, nonprofit, tribal government, and other public entities located in the United States and Canada. Vendor desires to contract with Sourcewell to provide equipment, products, or services to Sourcewell and its Members (Members). 1. TERM OF CONTRACT A. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Contract is effective upon the date of the final signature below. B. EXPIRATION DATE AND EXTENSION. This Contract expires November 15, 2023, unless it is cancelled sooner pursuant to Article 24. This Contract may be extended up to one additional one-year period upon request of Sourcewell and with written agreement by Vendor. C. SURVIVAL OF TERMS. Articles 11 through 16 survive the expiration or cancellation of this Contract. 2. EQUIPMENT, PRODUCTS, OR SERVICES A. EQUIPMENT, PRODUCTS, OR SERVICES. Vendor will provide the Equipment, Products, or Services as stated in its Proposal submitted under the Solicitation Number listed above. Vendor’s Equipment, Products, or Services Proposal (Proposal) is attached and incorporated into this Contract. All Equipment and Products provided under this Contract must be new/current model. Vendor may offer close-out or refurbished Equipment or Products if they are clearly indicated in Vendor’s product and pricing list. Unless agreed to by the Member in advance, Equipment or Products must be delivered as operational to the Member’s site. 1 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC This Contract offers an indefinite quantity of sales, and while substantial volume is anticipated, sales and sales volume are not guaranteed. B. LAWS AND REGULATIONS. All Equipment, Products, or Services must comply fully with applicable federal laws and regulations, and with the laws of the state or province in which the Equipment, Products, or Services are sold. C. WARRANTY. Vendor warrants that all Equipment, Products, and Services furnished are free from liens and encumbrances, and are free from defects in design, materials, and workmanship. In addition, Vendor warrants the Equipment, Products, and Services are suitable for and will perform in accordance with the ordinary use for which they are intended. Vendor’s dealers and distributors must agree to assist the Member in reaching a resolution in any dispute over warranty terms with the manufacturer. Any manufacturer’s warranty that is effective past the expiration of the Vendor’s warranty will be passed on to the Member. Notwithstanding the above, warranty issues related to the body and Heil factory-installed components shall be administered and resolved by The Heil Co. Warranty for third-party manufacturers such as the chassis chassis options or subsequently installed components shall be administered and addressed by the respective product manufacturer. D. DEALERS AND DISTRIBUTORS. Upon Contract execution, Vendor will make available to Sourcewell a means to validate or authenticate Vendor’s authorized Distributors/Dealers relative to the Equipment, Products, and Services related to this Contract. This list may be updated from time-to-time and is incorporated into this Contract by reference. It is the Vendor’s responsibility to ensure Sourcewell receives the most current version of this list. 3. PRICING All Equipment, Products, or Services under this Contract will be priced as stated in Vendor’s Proposal. Regardless of the payment method chosen by the Member, the total cost associated with any purchase option of the Equipment, Products, or Services must always be disclosed in the pricing quote to the applicable Member at the time of purchase. When providing pricing quotes to Members, all pricing quoted must reflect a Member’s total cost of acquisition. This means that the quoted cost is for delivered Equipment, Products, and Services that are operational for their intended purpose, and includes all costs to the Member’s requested delivery location. A. SHIPPING AND SHIPPING COSTS. All delivered Equipment and Products must be properly packaged. Damaged Equipment and Products may be rejected. If the damage is not readily apparent at the time of delivery, Vendor must permit the Equipment and Products to be 2 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC returned within a reasonable time at no cost to Sourcewell or its Members. Members reserve the right to inspect the Equipment and Products at a reasonable time after delivery where circumstances or conditions prevent effective inspection of the Equipment and Products at the time of delivery. B. Vendor must arrange for and pay for the return shipment on Equipment and Products that arrive in a defective or inoperable condition. Product returns shall only be available in the event Vendor is notified of a body problem in writing and has not resolved the issue within thirty (30) days after receipt of said Notice. Sourcewell may declare the Vendor in breach of this Contract if the Vendor intentionally delivers substandard or inferior Equipment or Products. In the event of the delivery of nonconforming Equipment and Products, the Member will notify the Vendor as soon as possible and the Vendor will replace nonconforming Equipment and Products with conforming Equipment and Products that are acceptable to the Member. C. SALES TAX. Each Member is responsible for supplying the Vendor with valid tax-exemption certification(s). When ordering, Members must indicate if it is a tax-exempt entity. D. HOT LIST PRICING. At any time during this Contract, Vendor may offer a specific selection of Equipment, Products, or Services at discounts greater than those listed in the Contract. When Vendor determines it will offer Hot List Pricing, it must be submitted electronically to Sourcewell in a line-item format. Equipment, Products, or Services may be added or removed from the Hot List at any time through a Sourcewell Price and Product Change Form as defined in Article 4 below. Hot List program and pricing may also be used to discount and liquidate close-out and discontinued Equipment and Products as long as those close-out and discontinued items are clearly identified as such. Current ordering process and administrative fees apply. Hot List Pricing must be published and made available to all Members. 4. PRODUCT AND PRICING CHANGE REQUESTS Vendor may request Equipment, Product, or Service changes, additions, or deletions at any time. All requests must be made in writing by submitting a signed Sourcewell Price and Product Change Request Form to the assigned Sourcewell Contract Administrator. This form is available from the assigned Sourcewell Contract Administrator. At a minimum, the request must: x Identify the applicable Sourcewell contract number x Clearly specify the requested change x Provide sufficient detail to justify the requested change x Individually list all Equipment, Products, or Services affected by the requested change, along with the requested change (e.g., addition, deletion, price change) 3 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC x Include a complete restatement of pricing documentation in Microsoft Excel with the effective date of the modified pricing, or product addition or deletion. The new pricing restatement must include all Equipment, Products, and Services offered, even for those items where pricing remains unchanged. A fully executed Sourcewell Price and Product Request Form will be become an amendment to this Contract and be incorporated by reference. 5. MEMBERSHIP, CONTRACT ACCESS, AND MEMBER REQUIREMENTS A. MEMBERSHIP. Membership in Sourcewell is open to public and nonprofit entities across the United States and Canada; such as municipal, state/province, K-12 and higher education, tribal government, and other public entities. The benefits of this Contract should be available to all Members that can legally access the Equipment, Products, or Services under this Contract. A Member’s authority to access this Contract is determined through its cooperative purchasing, interlocal, or joint powers laws. Any entity accessing benefits of this Contract will be considered a Service Member of Sourcewell during such time of access. Vendor understands that a Member’s use of this Contract is at the Member’s sole convenience and Members reserve the right to obtain like Equipment, Products, or Services from any other source. Vendor is responsible for familiarizing its sales and service forces with Sourcewell membership requirements and documentation and will encourage potential members to join Sourcewell. Sourcewell reserves the right to add and remove Members to its roster during the term of this Contract. B. PUBLIC FACILITIES. Vendor’s employees may be required to perform work at government- owned facilities, including schools. Vendor’s employees and agents must conduct themselves in a professional manner while on the premises, and in accordance with Member policies and procedures, and all applicable laws. 6. MEMBER ORDERING AND PURCHASE ORDERS A. PURCHASE ORDERS AND PAYMENT. To access the contracted Equipment, Products, or Services under this Contract, Member must clearly indicate to Vendor that it intends to access this Contract; however, order flow and procedure will be developed jointly between Sourcewell and Vendor. Typically a Member will issue a purchase order directly to Vendor. Members may use their own forms for purchase orders, but it should clearly note the applicable Sourcewell contract number. Members will be solely responsible for payment and Sourcewell will have no liability for any unpaid invoice of any Member. B. ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS. Additional terms and conditions to a purchase order may be negotiated between a Member and Vendor, such as job or industry-specific 4 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC requirements, legal requirements (such as affirmative action or immigration status requirements), or specific local policy requirements. Any negotiated additional terms and conditions must never be less favorable to the Member than what is contained in Vendor’s Proposal. C. PERFORMANCE BOND. If requested by a Member, Vendor will provide a performance bond that meets the requirements set forth in the Member’s purchase order. The cost of the bond premium shall be added to the cost of the Product. D. SPECIALIZED SERVICE REQUIREMENTS. In the event that the Member requires service or specialized performance requirements (such as e-commerce specifications, specialized delivery requirements, or other specifications and requirements) not addressed in this Contract, the Member and the Vendor may enter into a separate, standalone agreement, apart from this Contract. Sourcewell, including its agents and employees, will not be made a party to a claim for breach of such agreement. E. TERMINATION OF PURCHASE ORDERS. Members may terminate a purchase order, in whole or in part, immediately upon notice to Vendor in the event of any of the following events: 1. The Member fails to receive funding or appropriation from its governing body at levels sufficient to pay for the goods to be purchased; 2. Federal or state laws or regulations prohibit the purchase or change the Member’s requirements; or 3. Vendor commits any material breach of this Contract or the additional terms agreed to between the Vendor and a Member. F. GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE. The governing law and venue for any action related to a Member’s purchase order will be determined by the Member making the purchase. 7. CUSTOMER SERVICE A. PRIMARY ACCOUNT REPRESENTATIVE. Vendor will assign an Account Representative to Sourcewell for this Contract and must provide prompt notice to Sourcewell if that person is changed. The Account Representative will be responsible for: x Maintenance and management of this Contract; x Timely response to all Sourcewell and Member inquiries; and x Business reviews to Sourcewell and Members, if applicable. B. BUSINESS REVIEWS. Vendor must perform a minimum of one business review with Sourcewell per contract year. The business review will cover sales to members, pricing and 5 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC contract terms, administrative fees, supply issues, customer issues, and any other necessary information. 8. REPORT ON CONTRACT SALES ACTIVITY AND ADMINISTRATIVE FEE PAYMENT A. CONTRACT SALES ACTIVITY REPORT. Each calendar quarter, Vendor must provide a contract sales activity report (Report) to the Sourcewell Contract Administrator assigned to this Contract. A Report must be provided regardless of the number or amount of sales during that quarter (i.e., if there are no sales, Vendor must submit a report indicating no sales were made). The Report must contain the following fields: x Customer Name (e.g., City of Staples Highway Department); x Customer Physical Street Address; x Customer City; x Customer State; x Customer Zip Code; x Customer Contact Name; x Customer Contact Email Address; x Customer Contact Telephone Number; x Sourcewell Assigned Entity/Member Number; x Item Purchased Description; x Item Purchased Price; x Sourcewell Administrative Fee Applied; and x Date Purchase was invoiced/sale was recognized as revenue by Vendor. B. ADMINISTRATIVE FEE. In consideration for the support and services provided by Sourcewell, the Vendor will pay an administrative fee to Sourcewell on all Equipment, Products, and Services provided to Members. The Vendor will submit a check payable to Sourcewell for the percentage of administrative fee stated in the Proposal multiplied by the total sales of all Equipment, Products, and Services purchased by Members under this Contract during each calendar quarter. Payments should note the Sourcewell-assigned contract number in the memo and must be mailed to the address above “Attn: Accounts Receivable.” Payments must be received no later than forty-five (45) calendar days after the end of each calendar quarter. Vendor agrees to cooperate with Sourcewell in auditing transactions under this Contract to ensure that the administrative fee is paid on all items purchased under this Contract. In the event the Vendor is delinquent in any undisputed administrative fees, Sourcewell reserves the right to cancel this Contract and reject any proposal submitted by the Vendor in any subsequent solicitation. In the event this Contract is cancelled by either party prior to the Contract’s expiration date, the administrative fee payment will be due no more than thirty (30) days from the cancellation date. 6 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC 9. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Sourcewell's Authorized Representative is its Chief Procurement Officer. Vendor’s Authorized Representative is the person named in the Vendor’s Proposal. If Vendor’s Authorized Representative changes at any time during this Contract, Vendor must promptly notify Sourcewell in writing. 10. ASSIGNMENT, AMENDMENTS, WAIVER, AND CONTRACT COMPLETE A. ASSIGNMENT. Neither the Vendor nor Sourcewell may assign or transfer any rights or obligations under this Contract without the prior consent of the parties and a fully executed assignment agreement. Such consent will not be unreasonably withheld. B. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment to this Contract must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been fully executed by the parties. C. WAIVER. If either party fails to enforce any provision of this Contract, that failure does not waive the provision or the right to enforce it. D. CONTRACT COMPLETE. This Contract contains all negotiations and agreements between Sourcewell and Vendor. No other understanding regarding this Contract, whether written or oral, may be used to bind either party. E. RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES. The relationship of the parties is one of independent contractors, each free to exercise judgment and discretion with regard to the conduct of their respective businesses. This Contract does not create a partnership, joint venture, master- servant, principal-agent, or any other relationship. 11. LIABILITY Vendor must indemnify, save, and hold Sourcewell and its Members, including their agents and employees, harmless from any claims or causes of action, including attorneys’ fees, arising out of the performance of this Contract by the Vendor or its agents or employees; this indemnification includes injury or death to person(s) or property alleged to have been caused by some defect in the Equipment, Products, or Services under this Contract to the extent the Equipment, Product, or Service has been used according to its specifications. 12. AUDITS Sourcewell reserves the right to review the books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the Vendor relevant to this Contract for a minimum of six (6) years from the end of this Contract. This clause extends to Members as it relates to business conducted by that Member under this Contract. 7 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC 13. GOVERNMENT DATA PRACTICES Vendor and Sourcewell must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as it applies to all data provided by or provided to Sourcewell under this Contract and as it applies to all data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Vendor under this Contract. If the Vendor receives a request to release the data referred to in this article, the Vendor must immediately notify Sourcewell and Sourcewell will assist with how the Vendor should respond to the request. 14. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY As applicable, Vendor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Sourcewell and its Members against any and all suits, claims, judgments, and costs instituted or recovered against Sourcewell or Members by any person on account of the use of any Equipment or Products by Sourcewell or its Members supplied by Vendor in violation of applicable patent or copyright laws. 15. PUBLICITY, MARKETING, AND ENDORSEMENT A. PUBLICITY. Any publicity regarding the subject matter of this Contract must not be released without prior written approval from the Authorized Representatives. Publicity includes notices, informational pamphlets, press releases, research, reports, signs, and similar public notices prepared by or for the Vendor individually or jointly with others, or any subcontractors, with respect to the program, publications, or services provided resulting from this Contract. B. MARKETING. Any direct advertising, marketing, or offers with Members must be approved by Sourcewell. Materials should be sent to the Sourcewell Contract Administrator assigned to this Contract. C. ENDORSEMENT. The Vendor must not claim that Sourcewell endorses its Equipment, Products, or Services. 16. GOVERNING LAW, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE Minnesota law governs this Contract. Venue for all legal proceedings out of this Contract, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state court in Todd County or federal court in Fergus Falls, Minnesota. 8 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC 17. FORCE MAJEURE Neither party to this Contract will be held responsible for delay or default caused by acts of God or other conditions that are beyond that party’s reasonable control. A party defaulting under this provision must provide the other party prompt written notice of the default. 18. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Contract is found to be illegal, unenforceable, or void then both Sourcewell and Vendor will be relieved of all obligations arising under such provisions. If the remainder of this Contract is capable of performance, it will not be affected by such declaration or finding and must be fully performed. 19. PERFORMANCE, DEFAULT, AND REMEDIES A. PERFORMANCE. During the term of this Contract, the parties will monitor performance and address unresolved contract issues as follows: 1. Notification. The parties must promptly notify each other of any known dispute and work in good faith to resolve such dispute within a reasonable period of time. If necessary, Sourcewell and the Vendor will jointly develop a short briefing document that describes the issue(s), relevant impact, and positions of both parties. 2. Escalation. If parties are unable to resolve the issue in a timely manner, as specified above, either Sourcewell or Vendor may escalate the resolution of the issue to a higher level of management. The Vendor will have thirty (30) calendar days to cure an outstanding issue. 3. Performance while Dispute is Pending. Notwithstanding the existence of a dispute, the Vendor must continue without delay to carry out all of its responsibilities under the Contract that are not affected by the dispute. If the Vendor fails to continue without delay to perform its responsibilities under the Contract, in the accomplishment of all undisputed work, any additional costs incurred by Sourcewell and/or its Members as a result of such failure to proceed will be borne by the Vendor. B. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES. Either of the following constitutes cause to declare this Contract, or any Member order under this Contract, in default: 1. Nonperformance of contractual requirements, or 2. A material breach of any term or condition of this Contract. Written notice of default and a reasonable opportunity to cure must be issued by the party claiming default. Time allowed for cure will not diminish or eliminate any liability for liquidated or other damages. If the default remains after the opportunity for cure, the non-defaulting party may: 9 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC x Exercise any remedy provided by law or equity, or x Terminate the Contract or any portion thereof, including any orders issued against the Contract. 20. INSURANCE A. REQUIREMENTS. At its own expense, Vendor must maintain insurance policy(ies) in effect at all times during the performance of this Contract with insurance company(ies) licensed or authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota having an “AM BEST” rating of A- or better, with coverage and limits of insurance not less than the following: 1. Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability. Workers’ Compensation: As required by any applicable law or regulation. Employer's Liability Insurance: must be provided in amounts not less than listed below: Minimum limits: $500,000 each accident for bodily injury by accident $500,000 policy limit for bodily injury by disease $500,000 each employee for bodily injury by disease 2. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Vendor will maintain insurance covering its operations, with coverage on an occurrence basis, and must be subject to terms no less broad than the Insurance Services Office (“ISO”) Commercial General Liability Form CG0001 (2001 or newer edition). At a minimum, coverage must include liability arising from premises, operations, bodily injury and property damage, independent contractors, products-completed operations including construction defect, contractual liability, blanket contractual liability, and personal injury and advertising injury. All required limits, terms and conditions of coverage must be maintained during the term of this Contract. Minimum Limits: $1,000,000 each occurrence Bodily Injury and Property Damage $1,000,000 Personal and Advertising Injury $2,000,000 aggregate for Products-Completed operations $2,000,000 general aggregate 3. Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance. During the term of this Contract, Vendor will maintain insurance covering all owned, hired, and non-owned automobiles in limits of liability not less than indicated below. The coverage must be subject to terms no less broad than ISO Business Auto Coverage Form CA 0001 (2010 edition or newer). Minimum Limits: $1,000,000 each accident, combined single limit 4. Umbrella Insurance. During the term of this Contract, Vendor will maintain umbrella coverage over Workers’ Compensation, Commercial General Liability, and Commercial Automobile. 10 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC Minimum Limits: $2,000,000 5. Network Security and Privacy Liability Insurance. During the term of this Contract, Vendor will maintain coverage for network security and privacy liability. The coverage may be endorsed on another form of liability coverage or written on a standalone policy. The insurance must cover claims which may arise from failure of Vendor’s security resulting in, but not limited to, computer attacks, unauthorized access, disclosure of not public data – including but not limited to, confidential or private information, transmission of a computer virus, or denial of service. Minimum limits: $2,000,000 per occurrence $2,000,000 annual aggregate Failure of Vendor to maintain the required insurance will constitute a material breach entitling Sourcewell to immediately terminate this Contract for default. B. CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE. Prior to commencing under this Contract, Vendor must furnish to Sourcewell a certificate of insurance, as evidence of the insurance required under this Contract. Prior to expiration of the policy(ies), renewal certificates must be mailed to Sourcewell, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479 or sent to the Sourcewell Contract Administrator assigned to this Contract. The certificates must be signed by a person authorized by the insurer(s) to bind coverage on their behalf. All policies must include there will be no cancellation, suspension, non-renewal, or reduction of coverage without thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to the Vendor. Failure to request certificates of insurance by Sourcewell, or failure of Vendor to provide certificates of insurance, in no way limits or relieves Vendor of its duties and responsibilities in this Contract. C. ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT AND PRIMARY AND NON-CONTRIBUTORY INSURANCE CLAUSE. Vendor agrees to name Sourcewell and its Members, including their officers, agents, and employees, as an additional insured under the Vendor’s commercial general liability insurance policy with respect to liability arising out of activities, “operations,” or “work” performed by or on behalf of Vendor, and products and completed operations of Vendor. The policy provision(s) or endorsement(s) must further provide that coverage is primary and not excess over or contributory with any other valid, applicable, and collectible insurance or self-insurance in force for the additional insureds. D. WAIVER OF SUBROGATION. Vendor waives and must require (by endorsement or otherwise) all its insurers to waive subrogation rights against Sourcewell and other additional insureds for losses paid under the insurance policies required by this Contract or other insurance applicable to the Vendor or its subcontractors. The waiver must apply to all deductibles and/or self-insured retentions applicable to the required or any other insurance 11 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC maintained by the Vendor or its subcontractors. Where permitted by law, Vendor must require similar written express waivers of subrogation and insurance clauses from each of its subcontractors. E. UMBRELLA/EXCESS LIABILITY. The limits required by this Contract can be met by either providing a primary policy or in combination with umbrella/excess liability policy(ies). F. SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS. Any self-insured retention in excess of $10,000 is subject to Sourcewell’s approval. 21. COMPLIANCE A. LAWS AND REGULATIONS. All Equipment, Products, or Services provided under this Contract must comply fully with applicable federal laws and regulations, and with the laws in the states and provinces in which the Equipment, Products, or Services are sold. B. LICENSES. Vendor must maintain a valid status on all required federal, state, and local licenses, bonds, and permits required for the operation of the business that the Vendor conducts with Sourcewell and Members. 22. BANKRUPTCY, DEBARMENT, OR SUSPENSION CERTIFICATION Vendor certifies and warrants that it is not in bankruptcy or that it has previously disclosed in writing certain information to Sourcewell related to bankruptcy actions. If at any time during this Contract Vendor declares bankruptcy, Vendor must immediately notify Sourcewell in writing. Vendor certifies and warrants that neither it nor its principals are presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from programs operated by the State of Minnesota, the United States federal government, or any Member. Vendor certifies and warrants that neither it nor its principals have been convicted of a criminal offense related to the subject matter of this Contract. Vendor further warrants that it will provide immediate written notice to Sourcewell if this certification changes at any time. 23. PROVISIONS FOR NON-UNITED STATES FEDERAL ENTITY PROCUREMENTS UNDER UNITED STATES FEDERAL AWARDS OR OTHER AWARDS Members that use United States federal grant or FEMA funds to purchase goods or services from this Contract may be subject to additional requirements including the procurement standards of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, 2 C.F.R. § 200. Members may also require additional requirements based on specific funding specifications. Within this Article, all references to “federal” should be interpreted to mean the United States federal government. The following list only applies when 12 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC a Member accesses Vendor’s Equipment, Products, or Services with United States federal funds. A. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY. Except as otherwise provided under 41 C.F.R. § 60, all contracts that meet the definition of “federally assisted construction contract” in 41 C.F.R. § 60- 1.3 must include the equal opportunity clause provided under 41 C.F.R. §60-1.4(b), in accordance with Executive Order 11246, “Equal Employment Opportunity” (30 FR 12319, 12935, 3 C.F.R. §, 1964-1965 Comp., p. 339), as amended by Executive Order 11375, “Amending Executive Order 11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity,” and implementing regulations at 41 C.F.R. § 60, “Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor.” The equal opportunity clause is incorporated herein by reference. B. DAVIS-BACON ACT, AS AMENDED (40 U.S.C. § 3141-3148). When required by federal program legislation, all prime construction contracts in excess of $2,000 awarded by non- federal entities must include a provision for compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. § 3141-3144, and 3146-3148) as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 C.F.R. § 5, “Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Covering Federally Financed and Assisted Construction”). In accordance with the statute, contractors must be required to pay wages to laborers and mechanics at a rate not less than the prevailing wages specified in a wage determination made by the Secretary of Labor. In addition, contractors must be required to pay wages not less than once a week. The non-federal entity must place a copy of the current prevailing wage determination issued by the Department of Labor in each solicitation. The decision to award a contract or subcontract must be conditioned upon the acceptance of the wage determination. The non-federal entity must report all suspected or reported violations to the federal awarding agency. The contracts must also include a provision for compliance with the Copeland “Anti-Kickback” Act (40 U.S.C. § 3145), as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 C.F.R. § 3, “Contractors and Subcontractors on Public Building or Public Work Financed in Whole or in Part by Loans or Grants from the United States”). The Act provides that each contractor or subrecipient must be prohibited from inducing, by any means, any person employed in the construction, completion, or repair of public work, to give up any part of the compensation to which he or she is otherwise entitled. The non-federal entity must report all suspected or reported violations to the federal awarding agency. Vendor must be in compliance with all applicable Davis-Bacon Act provisions. C. CONTRACT WORK HOURS AND SAFETY STANDARDS ACT (40 U.S.C. § 3701-3708). Where applicable, all contracts awarded by the non-federal entity in excess of $100,000 that involve the employment of mechanics or laborers must include a provision for compliance with 40 U.S.C. § 3702 and 3704, as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 C.F.R. § 5). Under 40 U.S.C. § 3702 of the Act, each contractor must be required to compute the wages of every mechanic and laborer on the basis of a standard work week of 40 hours. Work in excess of the standard work week is permissible provided that the worker is compensated at a rate of not less than one and a half times the basic rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in the work week. The requirements of 40 U.S.C. § 3704 are applicable to construction 13 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC work and provide that no laborer or mechanic must be required to work in surroundings or under working conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous or dangerous. These requirements do not apply to the purchases of supplies or materials or articles ordinarily available on the open market, or contracts for transportation or transmission of intelligence. This provision is hereby incorporated by reference into this Contract. Vendor certifies that during the term of an award for all contracts by Sourcewell resulting from this procurement process, Vendor must comply with applicable requirements as referenced above. D. RIGHTS TO INVENTIONS MADE UNDER A CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT. If the federal award meets the definition of “funding agreement” under 37 C.F.R. § 401.2(a) and the recipient or subrecipient wishes to enter into a contract with a small business firm or nonprofit organization regarding the substitution of parties, assignment or performance of experimental, developmental, or research work under that “funding agreement,” the recipient or subrecipient must comply with the requirements of 37 C.F.R. § 401, “Rights to Inventions Made by Nonprofit Organizations and Small Business Firms Under Government Grants, Contracts and Cooperative Agreements,” and any implementing regulations issued by the awarding agency. Vendor certifies that during the term of an award for all contracts by Sourcewell resulting from this procurement process, Vendor must comply with applicable requirements as referenced above. E. CLEAN AIR ACT (42 U.S.C. § 7401-7671Q.) AND THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT (33 U.S.C. § 1251-1387). Contracts and subgrants of amounts in excess of $150,000 require the non-federal award to agree to comply with all applicable standards, orders or regulations issued pursuant to the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. § 7401- 7671q) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended (33 U.S.C. § 1251- 1387). Violations must be reported to the Federal awarding agency and the Regional Office of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Vendor certifies that during the term of this Contract will comply with applicable requirements as referenced above. F. DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION (EXECUTIVE ORDERS 12549 AND 12689). A contract award (see 2 C.F.R. § 180.220) must not be made to parties listed on the government wide exclusions in the System for Award Management (SAM), in accordance with the OMB guidelines at 2 C.F.R. §180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 (3 C.F.R. § 1986 Comp., p. 189) and 12689 (3 C.F.R. § 1989 Comp., p. 235), “Debarment and Suspension.” SAM Exclusions contains the names of parties debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded by agencies, as well as parties declared ineligible under statutory or regulatory authority other than Executive Order 12549. Vendor certifies that neither it nor its principals are presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation by any federal department or agency. G. BYRD ANTI-LOBBYING AMENDMENT, AS AMENDED (31 U.S.C. § 1352). Vendors must file any required certifications. Vendors must not have used federal appropriated funds to pay any person or organization for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a member of Congress, officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with obtaining any federal contract, grant, or any other award 14 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC covered by 31 U.S.C. § 1352. Vendors must disclose any lobbying with non-federal funds that takes place in connection with obtaining any federal award. Such disclosures are forwarded from tier to tier up to the non-federal award. Vendors must file all certifications and disclosures required by, and otherwise comply with, the Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment (31 U.S.C. § 1352). H. RECORD RETENTION REQUIREMENTS. To the extent applicable, Vendor must comply with the record retention requirements detailed in 2 C.F.R. § 200.333. The Vendor further certifies that it will retain all records as required by 2 C.F.R. § 200.333 for a period of three (3) years after grantees or subgrantees submit final expenditure reports or quarterly or annual financial reports, as applicable, and all other pending matters are closed. I. ENERGY POLICY AND CONSERVATION ACT COMPLIANCE. To the extent applicable, Vendor must comply with the mandatory standards and policies relating to energy efficiency which are contained in the state energy conservation plan issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. J. BUY AMERICAN PROVISIONS COMPLIANCE. To the extent applicable, Vendor must comply with all applicable provisions of the Buy American Act. Purchases made in accordance with the Buy American Act must follow the applicable procurement rules calling for free and open competition. K. ACCESS TO RECORDS (2 C.F.R. § 200.336). Vendor agrees that duly authorized representatives of a federal agency must have access to any books, documents, papers and records of Vendor that are directly pertinent to Vendor’s discharge of its obligations under this Contract for the purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts, and transcriptions. The right also includes timely and reasonable access to Vendor’s personnel for the purpose of interview and discussion relating to such documents. L. PROCUREMENT OF RECOVERED MATERIALS (2 C.F.R. § 200.322). A non-federal entity that is a state agency or agency of a political subdivision of a state and its contractors must comply with Section 6002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The requirements of Section 6002 include procuring only items designated in guidelines of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at 40 C.F.R. § 247 that contain the highest percentage of recovered materials practicable, consistent with maintaining a satisfactory level of competition, where the purchase price of the item exceeds $10,000 or the value of the quantity acquired during the preceding fiscal year exceeded $10,000; procuring solid waste management services in a manner that maximizes energy and resource recovery; and establishing an affirmative procurement program for procurement of recovered materials identified in the EPA guidelines. 15 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 091219-THC 24. CANCELLATION Sourcewell or Vendor may cancel this Contract at any time, with or without cause, upon sixty (60) days’ written notice to the other party. However, Sourcewell may cancel this Contract immediately upon discovery of a material defect in any certification made in Vendor’s Proposal. Termination of this Contract does not relieve either party of financial, product, or service obligations incurred or accrued prior to termination. Sourcewell The Heil Co. By: By: Jeremy Schwartz George Paturalski Title: Director of Operations & Procurement/CPO Date: _11/11/2019 | 4:17 PM CST Title: Assistant Secretary Date: Approved: By: Chad Coauette Title: Executive Director/CEO Date: 11/11/2019 | 6:44 PM CST 16 Rev. 4/2019 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 RFP 091219 - Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Vendor Details Company Name: The Heil Co. Does your company conduct business under any other name? If yes, please state: Address: (Heil) 2030 Hamilton Place Blvd, #200 Chattanooga, TN 37421 Contact: Burgess Lane Email: blane@doveresg.com Phone: 256-478-0425 HST#: 363896843 Submission Details Created On: Thursday July 11, 2019 09:28:35 Submitted On: Wednesday September 11, 2019 09:59:56 Submitted By: Burgess Lane Email: blane@doveresg.com Transaction #: 86955ac5-f190-4f28-b35f-31bdbabd60c1 Submitter's IP Address: 74.127.76.220 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 Specifications Proposer Identity & Authorized Representatives Line Item Question Response * 1 Proposer Legal Name (and applicable d/b/a, if any): The Heil Co. (“Heil") * 2 Proposer Address: 2030 Hamilton Place Blvd, #200 Chattanooga, TN 37421 * 3 Proposer website address: www.heil.com * 4 Proposer's Authorized Representative (name, title, address, email address & phone) (The representative must have authority to sign the “Proposer’s Assurance of Compliance” on behalf of the Proposer): Dave Young Vice President - Sales dyoung@doveresg.com 423-855-6353 * 5 Proposer's primary contact for this proposal (name, title, address, email address & phone): Burgess Lane Ready Truck Manager blane@heil.com 256-304-2218 * 6 Proposer's other contacts for this proposal, if any (name, title, address, email address & phone): Larry Angel General Manager Ready Trucks langel@heil.com 423-242-2967 Jim Whitlow Ready Truck Business Analyst jwhitlow@heil.com 256-845-8355 Company Information and Financial Strength Line Item Question Response * 7 Provide a brief history of your company, including your company’s core values, business philosophy, and industry longevity related to the requested equipment, products or services. Formed in 1901 by Julius P. Heil, Heil is the world’s premier manufacturer of ultra-durable, highly productive mobile refuse collection vehicles. Our product offering encompasses front loaders, rear loaders, side loaders, and multi-compartment vehicles, alternative fuels as well as special packages for organics. As the industry’s leading provider of mobile collection solutions, we operate with a clearly defined mission, vision, set of core values, and set of strategic priorities: Mission: Process, transport, and transform the solid waste stream into sustainable resources that benefit our customers and communities. Vision: Be the undisputed global leader in people, performance, and customer value in the solid waste and recycling industry. Core Values: • Collaborative Entrepreneurial Spirit • Winning Through Customers • High Ethical Standards, Openness, and Trust • Expectations for Results • Respects and Values People Strategic Priorities: • Safety • Quality • On-Time Delivery • Productivity Improvement In addition to the wide array of custom-configured refuse bodies, HEIL offers two innovative programs to assist customers with updating or enhancing their refuse collection fleets quickly. Ready Trucks Program For customers who need to grow their fleet quickly or replace tired trucks and would like to purchase a new Heil refuse collection vehicle, we offer our Ready Trucks Program. This Program enables customers to choose a heavy-duty unit from stock, equipped with our most requested options, and receive same-day shipping. For those customers who would like to make slight modifications to a stock unit, we offer the ability to customize a unit in inventory and have it ship within 60 calendar days as part of our 60-day Shipping Guarantee. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 We offer a large variety of chassis inventory for mounting Heil refuse collection bodies. At any given time, we either stock or have immediate access to 500 to 700 chassis, both conventional and cab-over engine models. With chassis production lead times currently as long as four (4) months and often as long as twelve (12) months in recent years, having chassis on hand will enable Heil to offer Sourcewell Members immediate access to the majority of our refuse collection vehicles. Having such a large product offering requires a substantial number of different chassis models. The table below demonstrates our extensive offering of both diesel and compressed natural gas (CNG) models: Chassis Manufacturer Cab-Over Conventional Autocar X X Crane Carrier X Freightliner X International X Hino X X Kenworth X Mack X X Peterbilt X X (Cab-over models are primarily used for Heil front loaders, automated side loaders and, to a les Appendix A. You will note that we are offering in excess of 200 different chassis specifications Heil Rental Programs Heil has relationships with Big Truck Rental, Rush Rentals and Premier Tr purchasing vehicles for a fleet. By renting, municipal customers can: • Start a new pickup or collection route due to annexation without the typical upfront investment. • Kick off a new route or relationship without the possible strain on cash flow. • Replace a unit that goes down unexpectedly or is in for service, in most cases within 24 hours. • Manage an emergency storm cleanup or another sudden situation where time is of the essence and expansion of service may need to be temporary, such as seasonal leaf and brush collection. • Determine which front, side or rear loader is the right solution for an application by testing a rental unit before buying. • Please see Appendix – BTR for Big Truck Rental pricing • Please see Appendix – Rush for Rush Rental pricing • Please see Appendix – Premier 1 and Premier 2 for Premier Truck Rental pricing Parts Central Parts Central offers Heil Certified OEM parts and a variety of aftermarket parts manufactured by Heil. Heil Certified OEM Parts are the most reliable replacement parts for Heil refuse collection vehicles. They’re made following the exact specifications and production processes on the same assembly lines as the parts originally installed on the vehicles. This means that they fit perfectly every time. Heil uses only the highest-quality materials for parts that last, minimizing costly downtime. Parts Central also offers the most requested aftermarket parts for Heil and other makes of refuse collection vehicles. Our aftermarket parts are designed and manufactured to strict standards and are backed by more than 118 years of industry experience and quality good enough to carry the Heil name. Most commonly requested parts are available for immediate, same-day delivery through a local authorized Heil Dealer. If customers require a part that’s not on the shelf locally, the dealer can expedite delivery from our main Parts Central warehouse in Fort Payne, Alabama. Orders for in-stock parts placed with the warehouse prior to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time will be shipped overnight. Even those hard-to-find parts for older refuse collection vehicles are often available through local Dealers for next-day delivery. * 8 Provide a detailed description of the products and services that you are offering in your proposal. Our product line consists of a series of commercial and residential equipment. They are divided into 9 sub categories: a) Front Loaders Half/Pack® Frontload Garbage Trucks. Heil’s Half/Pack has consistently delivered proven performance and continues to set the standard for front loaders. The Half/Pack is built for a long, reliable lifespan. Please see Appendix - Half Pack for more information regarding this product. Also, you may click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/front-end-loaders/half-pack HALF/PACK® FREEDOM™ FRONT LOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. Heil’s Half/Pack® Freedom front load garbage truck is the lightweight solution for commercial and residential refuse hauling routes, able to carry up to 11 tons of legal payload in its 28 yd. body. Please see DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 Appendix – Half Pack Freedom for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/front-end-loaders/half-pack-freedom HALF/PACK® COMMERCIAL FRONT LOAD GARBAGE TRUCK WITH ODYSSEY™ HYDRAULIC CONTROLS. This front loader features a refined hydraulic and electronic control system for maximum efficiency, reliability, and precise control. The Heil® Commercial Half/Pack® garbage truck with Odyssey™ Hydraulic Controls also has a single, easy-to-use joystick that requires minimal effort to operate, which saves time and increases productivity. Please see Appendix – Half Pack Commercial with Odyssey Controls for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/front-end-loaders/half-pack-commercial-odyssey HALF/PACK® SIERRA™ FRONT LOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. At 17,050 lbs (16% lighter than our standard Half/Pack® Front Loader), the Heil® Sierra™ front load garbage truck is a mid- weight solution for commercial and residential refuse routes that can carry more than 10 tons of legal payload in its 28 yd frontload hopper. Whether you haul commercial or residential refuse, the Half/Pack® Sierra™ is simply the best light-weight front loader, hands down. Please see Appendix – Half Pack Sierra for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/front-end-loaders/half-pack-sierra HALF/PACK® AUTOMATED RESIDENTIAL FRONT LOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. With major productivity enhancements, this game-changing automated front load garbage truck provides savings on residential refuse routes by eliminating high-maintenance items. For the most dependable Residential Front Loader in the business, you can count on the Heil® Half/Pack®. Please see Appendix – Half Pack Automated Residential for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/automated-front-loaders b) Rear Loaders POWERTRAK® COMMERCIAL PLUS HIGH CAPACITY REAR LOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. The Heil® PowerTrak® PLUS High Capacity Rear Load Garbage Truck's patented design mounts the tag axle to the chassis frame rail, making it more structurally sound than models with the tag axle integrated into the tailgate, and an optional pusher axle can be added to carry an even greater legal payload. Please see Appendix – PTC Plus for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/rear-loaders/powertrak-commercial-plus PT 1000™ SINGLE AXLE REAR LOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. With its 15-second cycle time, reload time of less than 6 seconds and its and large, 3 yd3 capacity hopper, this robust rear load garbage truck is the key to optimizing productivity on residential and commercial routes. Please see Appendix – PT1000 for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/rear-loaders/pt-1000 DURAPACK® 5000 REAR LOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. This tough and reliable high-compaction rear load garbage truck has a unique swing link design, along with the waste industry’s largest capacity hopper. A large 3.94 yards – and compaction up to 1,000 lbs per yd3 for increased productivity on your commercial and residential trash routes. Please see Appendix – DP5000 for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/rear-loaders/durapack-5000 POWERTRAK® COMMERCIAL REAR LOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. This powerful rear load garbage truck body has high-pressure hydraulics and dual-track design to provide an awesome compaction of up to 1,200 lbs per yard. The PowerTrak® 3.64 yd hopper handles construction, demolition, and bulk waste better than any commercial rear loader in its class. Please see Appendix – PTC for more information regarding this product. Also, please click this link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/rear-loaders/powertrak-commercial NON-CDL MINI REAR LOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. Don’t let the size fool you. The beauty of this highly maneuverable Non-CDL Rear Load Garbage Truck is its narrow, compact and lightweight design, making it ideal for commercial or residential waste hauling routes. Operators don’t need a commercial driver’s license (CDL) and the vehicle is exempt from Federal Excise Tax (FET). And the simple but effective swing link design means no slides, tracks or rollers, just compaction. Looking for the best Non-CDL Rear Load Garbage Truck Body on the market? Check out the Heil® Mini Rear Loader. Please see Appendix – Mini REL for more information regarding this product. Also, please click this link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/rear-loaders/mini-rear-loader c) Side Loaders LIBERTY™ AUTOMATED SIDELOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. The patented Python™ automated sideload garbage truck arm has a muscular, 9-foot reach, an 8-second cycle time and can lift up to 800 lbs. The incredibly lightweight Liberty™ automated side loader is perfect for residential collections. And the constant pack body – which is the lightest in the industry, has a patented paddle packer that continuously sweeps the hopper, eliminating the need to stop DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 and pack the load. Please see Appendix – Liberty for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/automated-side-loaders/liberty n * DURAPACK® PYTHON® AUTOMATED SIDE LOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. The patented Heil® Python® Side Load Automated Arm has a 9-foot reach, an 8-second cycle time and can lift up to 800 lbs, making it a strong and fast performer on any residential refuse route. And the DuraPack® Sideload body is the industry standard when it comes to dependability and toughness. Please see Appendix – Python for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/automated-side-loaders/durapack-python RAPID RAIL® AUTOMATED SIDE LOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. The Rapid Rail® Automated Side Loader garbage truck body has a 1,600 pound lift capacity, and allows for residential, commercial and multi-family refuse collection. It can handle 30-400 gallon refuse containers all day long with ease. The powerful arm has virtually zero kick out allowing operation in the tightest of alleys, and an 8-second cycle time means industry-leading productivity, all in combination with the lightest weight side loader in the industry. Please see Appendix – Rapid Rail for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/automated-side-loaders/rapid-rail DURAPACK® RAPID RAIL® SIDELOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. The DuraPack® Rapid Rail® Autom DuraPack® high- compaction sideload body makes for a reliable, tough RCV. Please see Appe https://www.heil.com/products/automated-side-loaders/durapack-rapid-rail MULTIPACK® AUTOMATED SIDE LOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. Heil® MultiPack® Sideload Garbage Truck Bodies combine the durable Heil® DuraPack®, the superior Python® automated arm and the proven DuraPack® 5000 refuse tailgate. It’s the only trash truck in the industry that can handle rear loader, side loader, and even commercial waste routes single-handedly. Please see Appendix – Multipack for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/automated-side-loaders/multipack d) Multi-Compartment Vehicles DURAPACK® 4060 SPLIT BODY REAR LOAD GARBAGE TRUCKS. The Heil® DuraPack® 4060 Split Body Rear Load Garbage Trucks are a win-win, allowing collection of multiple residential trash streams or recyclables. With the DuraPack® 4060 split body rear loader, one truck can do the work of two. And the reduced weight body means enhanced fuel economy and larger payloads on the route. Please see Appendix – 4060 for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/rear-loaders/durapack-4060 e) CNG Capabilities CNrG™ TAILGATE.The Heil® innovative, fully integrated CNrG™ tailgate fuel delivery system will revolutionize the way you use CNG garbage trucks. Please see Appendix – CNrG for more information. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/cng-capabilities/cnrg-tailgate CNG OPTIONS FOR GARBAGE TRUCKS. Heil® makes it easier than ever to realize the savings from CNG garbage trucks with our factory-direct CNG program. Please see Appendix – Heil CNG for more information. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/cng-capabilities/cng-options f) Organics ORGANIC WASTE COLLECTION TRUCKS AND EQUIPMENT. When it comes to waste stream diversion, one of the first targets is removing organic waste from the landfill. That’s where Heil comes in, with our Organics Waste Collection trucks and equipment. Whether your route is equipped with the PT-1000 or the iconic Heil® Rapid Rail®, we have organics processing options that allow you to meet your organics diversion targets. Please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/organics g) Parts Central Heil® Certified OEM Parts are the most reliable replacement parts for Heil® refuse trucks. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 These parts are made following the exact specifications and production processes on the same assembly lines as the parts originally installed on the vehicles. This means they fit perfectly every time. Heil® uses only the highest-quality materials for parts that last. Parts Central also offers the most requested aftermarket parts for Heil and other makes of garbage truck bodies. Our aftermarket parts are designed and manufactured to strict standards and are backed by more than 100 years of industry experience. High-volume parts that are frequently requested are available for immediate, same-day delivery through your local Authorized Heil® Dealer. Orders for in-stock parts placed with Parts Central before 5 p.m. ET will be shipped overnight. Please click below to view examples of this offering: https://www.heil.com/products/parts-central h) Bayne Thinline Premium Lift Systems Mobile Refuse Products. Bayne's diverse line lifters for mobile refuse truck lifters is second to none. Our lifters are the most reliable solution to your waste handling needs, and we offer complete solutions for almost any application or budget. Please see Appendix – Bayne for more information regarding this product. Also, please click below to view examples of this offering: https://www.baynethinline.com/products/mobile_refuse_products i) Third Eye Refuse Fleet Solutions. Refuse collection can be tricky business. Knowing that you’ve serviced a home or business is important. So is doing it productively and safely every time. 3rd Eye on- board camera systems constantly monitor your driver as well as their environment to ensure the safe operation of their vehicle. It also allows fleet owners immediate verification of service and video validation of overfilled containers – which can lead to more revenue / increased service frequency. 3rd Eye is the most technologically advanced refuse fleet management solution for the waste industry, trusted by companies all over the United States, just like yours. From Enhance Vehicle Behavioral Analytics™, 3rd Eye Digital, 3rd Eye Mobile, Collision Avoidance Radar and more, 3rd Eye has the most comprehensive refuse fleet management solutions on the market. Please see Appendix – 3rd Eye for more information regarding this product. Also, please click the link below to view examples of this offering: https://www.3rdeyecam.com/refuse-fleet-management-systems/ The attached Proposal is tendered in compliance with and conforms to the bid specification requirements of Sourcewell as set forth in solicitation #091219 identified with an initial submittal date of September 11, 2019. However, for complete clarity and transparency, the pricing and performance commitments contained herein are tendered to Sourcewell predicated on a mutual understanding and agreement on the following points of clarification: 1. Warranty issues related to the body and Heil factory-installed components shall be administered and resolved by The Heil Co. Warranty for 3rd party manufacturers such as the chassis, chassis options, or subsequently installed components shall be administered and addressed by the respective product manufacturer. 2. Product returns shall only be available in the event Heil is notified of a body problem in writing and has not resolved the issue within thirty (30) days after receipt of said Notice. 3. Consistent with section 10B of this Agreement, any supplemental terms or conditions on Member-supplied transactional paperwork (such as a Purchase Order) shall be null and void unless an Amendment to this Agreement is executed between Supplier and Member. 4. In the event a Member requires a Performance Bond from Supplier, the cost of the bond premium shall be added to the cost of the Product. 5. In relation to section 12. Audits, audits are restricted to pricing and invoicing to verify our compliance with the contract. 6. In order to avoid any confusion concerning the point that the Agreement governs the sale in section 6F, and any Purchase Order terms do not apply per section 10B, we would like to clarify that all actions at law would take place in Todd County or Fergus Falls, MN. 7. Regarding section 20 A.5, our products and services do not fall within this category. 8. Regarding section 20 B, we do not provide copies of our insurance policies, but do provide the required Certificate of Insurance to demonstrate our proof of insurance. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 9 What are your company’s expectations in the event of an award? As a company, we strive to live out the values we espouse of respecting people, maintaining th our product offerings and processes to provide the most extensive and complete portfolio of fir * 10 Demonstrate your financial strength and stability with meaningful data. This could include such items as financial statements, SEC filings, credit and bond ratings, letters of credit, and detailed reference letters. Upload supporting documents (as applicable) in the document upload section of your response. Please see Appendix B of this Proposal for a complete 2018 Dover Annual Report. Heil is an operating company within the Dover Company structure. https://investors.dovercorporation.com/annual- reports * 11 What is your US market share for the solutions that you are proposing? Although Heil is the leader in the US, we do not publish market share numbers. * 12 What is your Canadian market share, if any? Heil does not publish market shares. * 13 Has your business ever petitioned for bankruptcy protection? If so, explain in detail. No. We’ve never been subject of a bankruptcy action. * 14 How is your organization best described: is it a ma your written authorization to act as a distributor/dea with your sales and service force and with your dea a. Heil is a manufacturer and our dealer network is independently owned. b. Heil offers a case by case system of sales and marketing in the global market. In general, we employee our Dealer Network to cover cities and counties within all 50 states in the US and 7 Canadian provinces. Secondly, we employ Key Account Representatives where the volume of business warrants. Thirdly, we employ Regional Sales Managers to manage and coordinate the activities. All these individuals are employed by Heil, as follows: 1) Dealer Sales Representatives – Employed by Heil Dealers and they represent Heil from a Contract standpoint when quoting or selling Heil equipment to Sourcewell members. 2) Key Account Representatives – Employed by Heil 3) Regional Sales Managers – Employed by Heil * 15 If applicable, provide a detailed explanation outlining the licenses and certifications that are both required to be held, and actually held, by your organization (including third parties and subcontractors that you use) in pursuit of the business contemplated by this RFP. State of Tennessee - Motor Vehicle Manufacturer/Distributor License ID Number 00005771 Hamilton County, Tennessee - Business License License Number 052431 City of Chattanooga, Tennessee - Business Tax License State Tax Account # 501133955 Local Business Tax Account # 30101 The Heil Co. is an ISO-certified manufacturer. * 16 Provide all “Suspension or Disbarment” information that has applied to your organization during the past ten years. None * DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 17 Within this RFP category there may be subcategories of solutions. List subcategory titles that best describe your products and services. Our product line consists of a series of commercial and residential equipment. They are divided into 9 sub categories: Front Loaders Rear Loaders Side Loaders Multi-Compartment Vehicles CNG Capabilities * Organics Parts Central Bayne Thinline Premium Lift Systems Third Eye Industry Recognition & Marketplace Success Line Item Question Response * 18 Describe any relevant industry awards or recognition that your company has received in the past five years Heil holds more than 200 industry patents for solid waste and recycling innovations. We are al organizations: a. of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI) c. National Association for Information Destruction (NAID (WASTEC) In addition to these industry awards, we have the following recognitions: NWRA – 2014 Hall of fame induction – John Curotto, President, Curotto-Can, (subsidiary) NWRA – 2014 Hall of Fame induction – Bill Wilkerson, VP Sales and Marketing, Marathon (sister company) NJPA Pioneer Award - 2017 – Larry Angel – General Manager Ready Trucks * Pat Carroll, Heil President, is a member of the: a. Board of Governors of WASTEC b. Board of Directors of Environmental Research and Educational Foundation (EREF) 19 What percentage of your sales are to the governmental sector in the past three years 22% * 20 What percentage of your sales are to the education sector in the past three years Less than 1% as they generally do not pick up their own garbage. * 21 List any state or cooperative purchasing contracts that you hold. What is the annual sales volume for each of these contracts over the past three years? While Heil does not hold any other cooperative purchasing contracts, we do sell refuse trucks to our Dealer Network who utilize other procurement contracts including HGAC, Florida Sheriff’s Association, and the Texas Buy Board. * 22 List any GSA contracts that you hold. What is the annual sales volume for each of these contracts over the past three years? We do not have a GSA contract * References/Testimonials Line Item 23. Entity Name * Contact Name * Phone Number * City of Portsmouth Kenny Strickland stricklandk@portsmouthva.gov 757-393-8629 * City of Franklin VA Russell Pace rpace@franklinva.com 757-562-8562 * Dare County Shanna Fullmer shanna@darenc.com 252-423-0136 * City of Norfolk Rob Arnold robert.arnold@norfolk.gov 757-441-5813 University of Maryland Bill Guididas wguidida@umd.edu 301-405-3293 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 Top Five Government or Education Customers Line Item 24. Provide a list of your top five government, education, or non-profit customers (entity name is optional), including entity type, the state or province the entity is located in, scope of the project(s), size of transaction(s), and dollar volumes from the past three years. Entity Name Entity Type * State / Province * Scope of Work * Size of Transactions * Dollar Volume Past Three Years * City of New York City Government New York - NY 724 Refuse Trucks 724 $68 million * City of El Paso, TX Government Texas - TX 50 Refuse Trucks 50 $5 million * City of Austin, TX Government Texas - TX 49 Refuse Trucks 49 $5.7 million * City of Columbus, GA Government Georgia - GA 40 Refuse Trucks 40 $2.7 million * Metro Nashville, TN Government Tennessee - TN 38 Refuse Trucks 38 $2.5 million * Ability to Sell and Deliver Service Nationwide Describe your company’s capability to meet the needs of Sourcewell Members across the US, and Canada if applicable.Your response should address in detail at least the following areas: locations of your network of sales and service providers, the number of workers (full-time equivalents) involved in each sector, whether these workers are your direct employees (or employees of a third party), and any overlap between the sales and service functions. Line Item Question Response * 25 Sales force. Heil’s dealer network consists of 34 dealers located within North America. All dealer locations that support the Heil brand can provide customers with road service, if needed, and all dealers offer onsite service at customer locations. In addition, we have 8 Regional Managers that support the Heil Dealers in their respective territories to help expedite and facilitate solutions to meet the member’s needs. Please see Appendix C for a map of our dealer locations and service locations. Heil Region Name Regional Manager Name Location % Focus on Heil Sales & Services Northeast Jim Blanchard Boston, MA 100% North Atlantic Dennis Fallon Pittsburg, PA 100% Southeast Randy Wells Fort Payne, AL 100% Central Joe Howard Houston, TX 100% Midwest Bob McHugh Chattanooga, TN 100% West Bill Engstrom Hurricane, UT 100% Northwest Mike Tucker Denver, CO 100% Canada Craig Thomas St. Louis, MO 100% * DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 26 Dealer network or other distribution methods. Heil Dealer List: Heil Dealer Name City State Heil Region Heil of Texas - Irving, TX Irving TX Central Heil of Texas - San Antonio, TX San Antonio TX Central Ingram Equipment Company, LLC - Pelham, AL Pelham AL Southeast Ingram Equipment Company, LLC - Theodore, AL Theodore AL Southeast International Trucks of Hawaii - Kapolei, O'ahu, HI Kapolei, O'ahu HI West Kois Brothers Equipment Company, Inc. - Commerce City, CO Commerce City CO Northwest Kois Brothers Equipment Company, Inc. - Billings, MT Billings MT Northwest Kois Brothers Equipment Company, Inc. - Great Falls, MT Great Falls MT Northwest Armor Equipment - Arnold, MO Arnold MO Midwest Balar Equipment Corporation - Phoenix, AZ Phoenix AZ West Bell Equipment Company - Lake Orion, MI Lake Orion MI North Atlantic Bell Equipment Company - Gahanna, OH Gahanna OH North Atlantic Bob's Services - Anchorage, AK Anchorage AK Northwest Bodyworks Equipment, Inc. - Monrovia, CA Monrovia CA West MacQueen Equipment, Inc. - Menomonee Falls, WI Menomonee Falls WI Midwest Carolina Environmental Systems, Inc. - Kernersville, NC Kernersville NC Southeast Carolina Environmental Systems, Inc. - Greenville, SC Greenville SC Southeast Carolina Environmental Systems, Inc. - Austell, GA Austell GA Southeast Central Indiana Truck Equipment (CITE) - Indianapolis, IN Indianapolis IN Midwest Cyncon Equipment Company - Rush, NY Rush NY Northeast Heil of Texas - Houston, TX Houston TX Central Stringfellow, Inc - Nashville, TN Nashville TN Midwest Stringfellow, Inc - Chattanooga, TN Chattanooga TN Midwest Sunbelt Hydraulics and Equipment, Inc. - Pompano Beach, FL Pompano Beach FL Southeast Tampa Crane and Body, Inc. - Tampa, FL Tampa FL Southeast MacQueen Equipment, Inc. - Ankeny, IA Ankeny IA Midwest United Engines, LLC - Oklahoma City, OK Oklahoma City OK Central Utility Truck Equipment Company (UTEC) - Lake Charles, LA Lake Charles LA Central Vasso Waste Systems, Inc. - Brooklyn, NY Brooklyn NY Northeast Fer-Marc Equipment, Ltd. - Regina, SK Regina SK Canada Ray Max Equipment Sales - Calgary, Alberta, AB Calgary, Alberta AB Canada Saniquip, Inc Riguad QC Canada Vimar Equipment, LTD Burnaby BC Canada Binzz Inc. - Campbellville, ON Brampton ON Canada Legacy Equipment Company - Salt Lake City, UT Salt Lake City UT Northwest MacQueen Equipment, Inc. - St. Paul, MN St. Paul MN Midwest Maine Equipment Company, Inc - Hermon, ME Hermon ME Northeast Mid-Atlantic Waste Systems - Easton, MD Easton MD North Atlantic Mid-Atlantic Waste Systems - Salem, VA Salem VA North Atlantic Mid-Atlantic Waste Systems - Chesapeake, VA Chesapeake VA North Atlantic Mid-Atlantic Waste Systems - New Castle, PA New Castle DE North Atlantic Mid-Atlantic Waste Systems - Clinton, MD Clinton MD North Atlantic Mid-Atlantic Waste Systems - Pittsburgh, PA Cheswick PA North Atlantic MacQueen Equipment, Inc. - Lincoln, NE Lincoln NE Midwest Northern Truck Equipment Corporation - Sioux Falls, SD Sioux Falls SD Midwest Northern Truck Equipment Corporation - Fargo, ND Fargo ND Midwest Northern Truck Equipment Corporation - Rapid City, SD Rapid City SD Midwest Preferred Truck & Equipment Repairs, Inc. - Sacramento, CA Sacramento CA West River City Hydraulics, Inc. - Sherwood, AR Sherwood AR Central River City Hydraulics, Inc. - Baton Rouge, LA Baton Rouge LA Central River City Hydraulics, Inc. - Memphis, TN Memphis TN Central Ruckstell California Sales Company, Inc - Fresno, CA Fresno CA West EJ Equipment - Addison, IL Addison IL Midwest Action Fleet Repair - North Las Vegas, NV North Las Vegas NV West Environmental Equipment Sales & Service, LLC Sutton MA Northeast Armor Equipment - Olathe, KS Olathe KS Midwest Heil of Texas - El Paso, TX El Paso TX Central EJ Equipment - Manteno, IL Manteno IL Midwest Preferred Truck & Equipment Repairs, Inc. - Livermore, CA Livermore CA West * 27 Service force. Our Heil Dealer Network comprises 60 locations to service customers. In addition to these dealer technicians, Heil also has 8 Field Service Technicians that are also available to service members if the need requires it. Support for our customers is a priority and we make it as easy as possible through our dealer locator on the Heil website, easy to access email for Heil Tech Support as well as the Heil Tech Support phone number. Please click the link below to see the ease of access: https://www.heil.com/support * DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 28 Describe in detail the process and procedure of your customer service program, if applicable. Include your response-time capabilities and commitments, as well as any incentives that help your providers meet your stated service goals or promises. Heil Environmental has dedicated Customer Care and Support for new refuse equipment sales on site as well as through our extensive US dealer network. Heil also offers OEM part sales and support through Heil Parts Central. For new unit sales, Heil’s release management process provides firm commitment dates on standard orders within 72 hours. All Heil products are manufactured and inspected throughout the build process building quality into every Heil product from the start. Quality Control reviews every unit before shipment to ensure every product is 100% accurate to the customer’s request and order submission. OEM part sales are available through Heil Parts Central’s 24-hours a day e-commerce website al Representatives for these products as well. At Heil we pride ourselves on customer satisfaction * 29 Identify any geographic areas of the United States that you will NOT be fully serving through the proposed contract. Heil is fully prepared and uniquely capable of servicing ALL Sourcewell Member geographic areas and market segments under this contract in the United States, Canada, and internationally. * 30 Identify any Sourcewell Member sectors (i.e., government, education, not-for-profit) that you will NOT be fully serving through the proposed contract. Explain in detail. For example, does your company have only a regional presence, or do other cooperative purchasing contracts limit your ability to promote another contract? There will be no exclusions of Sourcewell Members from our contract related to this RFP. Heil is fully prepared and uniquely capable of servicing ALL Sourcewell Member segments. * 31 Define any specific contract requirements or restrictions that would apply to our Members in Hawaii and Alaska and in US Territories. The requirements for shipping a piece of equipment via an ocean-going vessel will vary depending on the port of departure and the port of delivery. In some cases, full or partial payment of equipment may be required prior to loading onto the shipping vessel or exiting port after loaded. * Marketing Plan Line Item Question Response * 32 Describe your marketing strategy for promoting this contract opportunity. Upload representative samples of your marketing materials (if applicable) in the document upload section of your response. Heil is very aggressive in our marketing of the opportunities provided us by our association with Sourcewell. We have one of the nation’s largest dealer networks – and work with them, provide training and guidance regarding how to best take advantage of our Sourcewell contract. In addition, we use our in-house video production team to further enhance both the brand – and the strength of partnering with Sourcewell through both our Sourcewell video testimonial – and through our popular ReadyTruck video series – which plugs Sourcewell during every episode. Both of these channels are popular and viewed by our following. These can also be found on our website – which garners more traffic than any of our competitors [based on Moz and Google Analytics reporting]. In addition, we display our Sourcewell contract proudly on our website, as well as on all of our eBrochures. * 33 Describe your use of technology and digital data (e.g., social media, metadata usage) to enhance marketing effectiveness. Effective SEO is a key component of all of ESG’s web properties and Heil, Marathon, and 3rd Eye all have robust social media strategies that highlight wins, customers, and information pertinent to the waste industry. We are leading all of our competitors in our SEO search metrics as can be seen in the attached charts. We have always looked at our SEO strategy as a “discipline” vs. a process – and we feel that our dominance in this area is a testament to that. Combined with this strategy are tools that monitor our website traffic and provide very granular metrics regarding who is on our site, what they are looking for – and how often they visit. This information is then automatically delivered to our sales teams to ensure they track the lead through revenue generation. * 34 In your view, what is Sourcewell’s role in pr Sourcewell- awarded contract into your sale Sourcewell is seen has a valuable partner in the implementation and success of this contract. As such, we believe that Sourcewell’s role as a joint partner in all marketing collaterals is essential. As part of our partnership, Heil will be responsible for increasing Sourcewell awareness and the inherent benefits of the contract through our various dealer sales meetings, national Heil sales meetings and any trade shows in which we participate. In exchange, we would expect that Sourcewell will promote Heil on the Sourcewell website, in the quarterly Newsletter, in all Sourcewell literature, and at all applicable marketing resources and publications. * 35 Are your products or services available throu e- procurement system and how governmen No. Due to the many options that are offered on both body and chassis and the electronic interactions that have to occur between the two units, we feel it prudent to involve our Dealer Representatives that are trained to know what will work together and what will not. It is too complicated to just select options and hope it will work, and this will help protect the member’s procurement teams who may not be as knowledgeable regarding product options and applications by utilizing the trained staff at our dealer locations. * Value-Added Attributes Line Item Question Response * DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 36 Describe any product, equipment, maintenance, or operator training programs that you offer to Sourcewell Members. Include details, such as whether training is standard or optional, who provides training, and any costs that apply. Heil offers a wide array of custom training programs that keeps our sales management and Dealer sales force up to speed on our products. From selling techniques, technical product and operator trainings, to product maintenance schools, every aspect of selling and promoting our vehicles is covered. We have been extremely successful with these programs and will be offering them again to our Sourcewell members to further their education on mobile refuse collection vehicles. They consist of: • In-person training sessions. They are performed in our Fort Payne, Alabama and Vernon, Alabama production facilities. The proximity of the factory makes it easier for the Sourcewell Members to fully comprehend what separates our mobile refuse vehicles from our competitors. • Mobile training trailers that travel throughout the United States. These two unique and first in the industry mobile classrooms bring education directly to our customers. As a customer-oriented company, we believe this type of training eliminates travel time, job downtime, and related costs for course attendees. In fact, they can be set up onsite at a customer or Dealer location and are equipped with the latest technology to deliver customer-specific content in air-conditioned comfort. • Heil Service Shack video trainings available to our Sourcewell members in the form videos posted on our various social media sites. These are available in English, Spanish and French Canadian. Follow the links below for examples: English https://vimeo.com/281281938/636d4ccd22 * French Canadian https://vimeo.com/281969922 Spanish https://vimeo.com/274579697 37 Describe any technological advances that your proposed products or services offer. • Safety via cameras and radar with the ability to record all cameras on the truck (when installed with 3rd Eye’s Hurricane Gateway) • Asset utilization: be able to record and track the hours and location of your assets • Equipment behavior: know that status of your garbage truck’s hopper, compactor and ancillary equipment in real time • On Road / Off Road: know when your assets are on highway and when they are not • Integrating lightweight composites into non-critical areas of our refuse collection bodies to produce the lightest weight refuse collection vehicle on the market today with the largest legal payload – 11+ tons. • Adding the Heil Overweight Prevention System™ (HOPS™) to our refuse collection vehicles to monitor vehicle weight while on route. HOPS uses axle transducer scales, accurate to within 2%, to determine the vehicle’s gross weight. When the unit approaches its maximum allowable weight, the driver receives audible and visual signals inside the cab. When the unit reaches its maximum allowable weight, the system prevents the operator from collecting any more cans. This helps ensure full loads, minimizes exposure to overweight fines, and extends the life of the vehicle. • Heil’s Automated Front Loader with Odyssey controls and hydraulics launched in mid-2013 redefining automated and bulk refuse collection levels. Pressure compensated piston pump, positions sensing cylinders and control logic drove weight out of the product while significantly reducing complexity, increasing reliability resulting in industry leading uptime and lowest Total Cost of Ownership. • No other residential front loader garbage truck features the Half/Pack® smart design, with all of its systems working together to reduce the total cost of operation. It’s more efficient, easier to operate, easier to service, and less likely to need service in the first place. • The Half/Pack® Freedom™ frontload trash truck weighs only 15,700 pounds, which is 19% lighter than a standard Half/Pack® and 1,350 pounds lighter than the lightweight Half/Pack® Sierra™. The Freedom™ can carry up to 11 tons of legal payload in its 28 cubic yard front load body – the largest legal payload – and features a 12 cubic yard hopper and a frontload arm lifting capacity of 8,000 pounds. To ensure the Half/Pack® Freedom™ front loader maintains its long-term durability, we have added an innovative load-control system to the unit called the Heil® Optimal Payload System™ or HOPS™. • The Heil® Half/Pack® front-load garbage truck with Odyssey™ hydraulic controls has a single, easy- to-use joystick that maximizes ergonomics by requiring minimal effort to operate and increases productivity. It is also equipped with an Insight Display, an in-cab display that provides real-time feedback, as well as optimal operator control. * DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 38 Describe any “green” initiatives that relate to your company or to your products or services, and include a list of the certifying agency for each. As a leader in the solid waste and recycling industry, Heil maintains a corporate mission to provide customers with innovative solutions for processing, transporting, and transforming the solid waste stream into sustainable resources that benefit both our customers and our communities. To that end, ZHVWULYHWRLQFRUSRUDWHʊJUHHQSUDFWLFHVLQWRRXUFRmpany processes as well as into our products. Here are some examples: • We have installed a CNG fueling station at our Fort Payne, Alabama production facility to meet the fueling needs of refuse collection units leaving the plant as well as to support the fueling of privately owned CNG-powered vehicles in the local community. • As part of our manufacturing process we install CNG fuel systems on many new customer trucks while meeting the growing demand for gas fueling applications. In Heil production facilities, we: • Recycle 100% of the scrap steel used to make our products • Use a low VOC electrostatic paint process to paint our lifters, refuse collection bodies, compactors, and balers • Actively recycle cardboard, aluminum, plastic, office paper, and wooden pallets • Our green products include: • Use of hybrid and CNG-fueling systems on our Heil refuse collection bodies • Building innovative, lightweight Heil refuse collection units that reduce costs associated with fuel, tires, and brakes • Our patented Odyssey™ hydraulic control technology delivers waste industry-leading productivity with the lowest total cost of ownership, helping refuse haulers make more money on the route. This system is designed to help operators finish routes up to 20% faster, deliver measurable fuel savings while reducing wear on the lift assembly, chassis, engine, and transmission. Plus, it greatly reduces noise pollution. * • $VD'RYHUFRPSDQ\+HLOVXSSRUWV'RYHU&RUSRUDWLRQ¶Vʊ6XVWDLQDELOLW\3ROLF\DORQJ-term commitment to operational excellence that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the use of volatile organic compounds (VOC), metal and cardboard consumption, and landfill utilization across the enterprise. • Specifically, Dover has committed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption by 20% each by the year 2020. Many Dover operating companies have already achieved significant energy and energy cost reductions in their operations. Launched in 2012, Dover's Energy Efficiency Captain Program has created a knowledge sharing community of operating company professionals to discuss energy efficiency and sustainability initiatives at their facilities. Initial findings from 2012 data indicate that 39 energy efficiency projects were implemented, with over 8,000 MWh in savings. To learn more, please click the following link: https://www.dovercorporation.com/about-us/sustainability/intensity-goals 39 Identify any third-party issued eco- labels, ratings or certifications that your company has received for the equipment or products included in your Proposal related to energy efficiency or conservation, life-cycle design (cradle-to-cradle), or other green/sustainability factors. Heil is continually innovating toward solving all sorts of hard problems that enable our customers to be more safe and efficient. One example of this is the way Odyssey controls help to conserve energy through smart hydraulic power management. By providing the right amount of power only when it is needed, energy is conserved. Specifically, utilizing a variable displacement pump combined with a load sensing hydraulic valve and proportional control system, operators get the finesse and power they need while fuel economy improves. Moreover, in our more conventional designs, complete disengagement of the hydraulic pump, via a hot shift pto, eliminates parasitic loss which also improves fuel efficiency. One of the more substantial efficiency improvements with the Odyssey comes from system productivity. The entire system efficiency plays a major role in fuel usage when viewed from the perspective of ‘cans-per- gallon’. The Odyssey design takes seconds off of packer and auto-lift cycles. Combine this with the inherent ergonomics and maneuverability of the Curotto Can and the unit finishes the route substantially faster than conventional RCVs. Of vital importance is the fact that when the key switch is off, there is 100% fuel savings. The culmination of these highly engineered features results in a product that has the potential to save hours a week in operational costs. All things being equal, if a route is completed in 9 hours verses 10; there is a 10% fuel savings. Energy conservation is of critical importance to all stakeholders in the RCV industry. Heil recognizes this and has responded with a highly engineered product that lives up to the Heil legacy. This has been accomplished through the designs, measurements and analysis reflected here, and is meant to help end users succeed in their social, financial and environmental goals. * 40 Describe any Women or Minority Business Entity (WMBE), Small Business Entity (SBE), or veteran owned business certifications that your company or hub partners have obtained. Upload documentation of certification (as applicable) in the document upload section of your response. As an operating entity of a public company, Heil is not certified as a WMBE or SBE business entity. However, five of our dealers are certified as WMBE business entities: Heil of Texas, River City Hydraulics, Ingram Equipment, UTEC, and Fer-Marc Equipment. * DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 41 What unique attributes does your company, your products, or your services offer to Sourcewell Members? What makes your proposed solutions unique in your industry as it applies to Sourcewell members? • The ability to be a single source provider for equipment, parts and service under this contract • Offer a full range of RCV products - Front Loader, Automated Front Loader, Side Loader and Rear Loader. • Localized parts inventories at your Dealer Locations for all models • All RCV’s offered are manufactured in the US and comply with current ANSI and FMVSS requirements • 60 authorized US and Canada Dealer locations capable of providing complete Sales, Parts & Service • All Dealers routinely evaluated to ensure they are providing superior quality and service • Directly employ 8 technicians who provide factory and field support for all products offered, with access to over 650 engineering and manufacturing personnel • Own well over 200 patents • All warranty handled direct without pass through to an outside supplier or manufacturer • Preventative maintenance programs available • Complete service, operator, factory and field training available for authorized Dealers and customers across all product lines • Offer on-site alternative fuel system installation • On-site alternative fuel filling station • On the ground, completed and ready to go factory RCV inventory program with equipment available for immediate delivery • Rental program to fulfill equipment needs prior to completing a Sourcewell transaction • Factory and Dealer demos available for on route demonstrations • Utilize multiple software tools to collect data and analyze route information to offer best-product solutions and optimize Total Cost of Ownership for varying user conditions • Sales, parts and service marketing programs available to Dealers for all products * 42 Identify your ability and willingness to provide your products and services to Sourcewell member agencies in Canada. Heil is uniquely capable and fully prepared to service Sourcewell Members in Canada and around the globe. We have 5 dealers in the Canadian Provinces with many representatives who are bilingual where applicable, as well as a widespread network of representation around the world in various countries, all of whom are managed by Heil Export Sales Team. Heil is also the preferred supplier of refuse collection bodies to many the largest waste management companies that currently serve the Canadian market as well as Canada’s largest rental fleet. * Warranty Describe in detail your manufacturer warranty program, including conditions and requirements to qualify, claims procedure, and overall structure. You may upload representative samples of your warranty materials (if applicable) in the document upload section of your response in addition to responding to the questions below. Line Item Question Response * 43 Do your warranties cover all products, parts, and labor? The initial 1-year standard warranty coverage includes parts and labor for 12 months or 2000 hours. In addition to the 1-year standard warranty, there are also various extended warranty packages that may be purchased depending on the needs of the individual member. * 44 Do your warranties impose usage restrictions or other limitations that adversely affect coverage? Heil® Certified OEM Parts are the most reliable replacement parts for Heil® refuse trucks. These parts are made following the exact specifications and production processes on the same assembly lines as the parts originally installed on the vehicles. This means they fit perfectly every time. Heil® uses only the highest-quality materials for parts that last, therefore, OEM parts must be used to continue warranty coverage. Heil does not assume any liability for warranty considerations due to any improper use, operation beyond rated equipment/component capacity, substitution of parts that are not Heil-approved, or any alteration or repair by others in such a manner that affects the product operation or integrity. * 45 Do your warranties cover the expense of technicians’ travel time and mileage to perform warranty repairs? Although we do not cover the expense of travel time and mileage for warranty repairs, the Heil Warranty Request Order Form (referred to as the WRO Form) is used to request approval for policy adjustment of warranty coverage requesting unusual or non-standard repair(s) and exceptions such as these may be considered. * 46 Are there any geographic regions of the United States (and Canada, if applicable) for which you cannot provide a certified technician to perform warranty repairs? How will Sourcewell Members in these regions be provided service for warranty repair? Heil is fully prepared and uniquely capable of servicing ALL Sourcewell member geographic areas and market segments under this contract in the United States and Canada. The first level of service would be through the Authorized Heil Dealer network, and if required, the Field Service team within our Heil Technical Support Group. * 47 Will you cover warranty service for items made by other manufacturers that are part of your proposal, or are these warranties issues typically passed on to the original equipment manufacturer? Yes. Heil pays warrantable claims and then we work internally with our suppliers toward recovery where applicable. * 48 What are your proposed exchange and return programs and policies? OEM parts purchased from the Heil Dealer through Parts Central can sometimes be considered for return or exchange depending on certain criteria, such as being a current production part, and are evaluated on a case by case basis. Cylinders, when applicable, ship back to cylinder OEM for evaluation. Non-cylinder claims may require return to Heil and is determined through the warranty and repair process. * 49 Describe any service contract options for the items included in your proposal. Each dealer in our extensive network establishes the pricing for and manages service contracts on a localized basis for our customers based on their individual needs. * DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 Payment Terms and Financing Options Line Item Question Response * 50 What are your payment terms (e.g., net 10, net 30)? Heil’s payment terms are Net 30. * 51 Do you provide leasing or financing options, especially those options that schools and governmental entities may need to use in order to make certain acquisitions? Yes. Since March of 2017, Heil has been partnered with DLL Financial Solutions to offer value-added retail financing and leasing programs. With over 35 years of proven vendor finance experience, DLL provides flexible finance solutions to customers around the globe. They are a reliable name and fully support all Heil US and Canadian dealers. DLL does offer flexible tax- exempt equipment financing solutions as well as Tax-exempt Municipal Lease Purchase options for State and local governments, public school districts and public colleges and universities. In addition to this, Heil has a good working relationship with the team at National Cooperative Leasing and are very willing to work with them also. * 52 Briefly describe your proposed order process. Include enough detail to support your ability to report quarterly sales to Sourcewell as described in the Contract template. For example, indicate whether your dealer network is included in your response and whether each dealer (or some other entity) will process the Sourcewell Members’ purchase orders. All orders for Heil products will be handled by each Member’s local Heil Dealer, except for those sales territories where products are sold direct via our internal sales team. For those orders, the Member will work directly with the Heil Regional Manager for the territory who will handle the entire order process. From time to time the situation may arise where we can authorize another entity working in conjunction with our Heil dealer to offer the member a proposal using our contract. An example of this might be where a license is needed to sell a chassis in a certain location, but our Heil dealer is selling a turn key solution to the Sourcewell member. In this example, the purchase order might be issued to an entity not listed as a Heil dealer, but the Heil dealer is initiating the proposal to the Sourcewell member and providing the member with a simple, single purchase order solution. * The Heil website (www.heil.com) can be accessed 24 hours per day, seven days per week. The site offers an interactive listing of authorized Heil dealers Members can use to find their local Sourcewell dealer/representative, who they will call directly to answer questions or to place an order. The Heil representative responsible for the territory of a Sourcewell member will work directly with them to identify the member’s equipment needs. Once all equipment requirements have been determined, the representative will accept a PO directly from the Sourcewell member, complete all necessary paperwork, and place the member’s order with Heil. 53 Do you accept the P-card procurement and payment process? If so, is there any additional cost to Sourcewell Members for using this process? With all orders for Heil products being handled by the local Heil Dealer, payments are made directly to the respective dealer. Due to expense associated with fees related to a capital expense of this size, P-Card payments are not feasible. We believe this better serves the Sourcewell members in keeping costs lower. * Pricing and Delivery Provide detailed pricing information in the questions that follow below. Keep in mind that reasonable price and product adjustments can be made during the term of an awarded Contract as desribed in the RFP, the template Contract, and the Sourcewell Price and Product Change Request Form. Line Item Question Response * 54 Describe your pricing model (e.g., line-item discounts or product- cat materials (if applicable) in the document upload section of your resp Heil maintains individual MSRP Price Lists for each of our equipment product offerings and would use a “Percentage Discount from Catalog” model for pricing our products under this contract. For the 12,000 plus available parts offered, the pricing is also a “Percentage Discount” model. We have included copies of our MSRP equipment (See Appendix D) and parts pricing (See Appendix E for Heil Parts Pricing, Appendix F for Bayne Parts Pricing and Appendix G for Curotto Can Parts Pricing). Within the MSRP Price Guide, the Sourcewell member will find each product offered at various body sizes along with multiple options available to the member to meet their specific requirement. Due to the many options that are offered on both body and chassis and the electronic interactions that occur between the two units, we feel it prudent to involve our Dealer Representatives that are trained to know what will work together and what will not. Once the member has met with and defined a body and chassis specification that they desire, the Heil Dealer will provide them a quote that would contain the itemized list of the body with options and a total price. If the member wanted to verify that the quote was compliant to the contract, they would be able to compare the two documents to ensure they are not paying more than the 4% off MSRP. * DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 55 Quantify the pricing discount represented by the pricing proposal in this response. For example, if the pricing in your response represents a percentage discount from MSRP or list, state the percentage or percentage range. If awarded a contract, we would offer Sourcewell Members a discount of 4% off MSRP for all products and services which would represent the ceiling price a member would pay to a Heil Dealer although the exception to this would be the chassis. See Appendix A for Chassis Specs and Pricing. Note, this discount does not apply to equipment rentals through those various entities. The rental pricing submitted has already taken this discount. * 56 Describe any quantity or volume discounts or rebate programs that you offer. Although Heil does not offer volume rebate programs, since our pricing is a ceiling- based approach for the Sourcewell member, a specific opportunity consisting of a high volume of units would certainly be reviewed. * 57 Propose a method of facilitating “sourced” products or related services, which may be referred to as “open market” items or “nonstandard options”. For example, you may supply such items “at cost” or “at cost plus a percentage,” or you may supply a quote for each such request. In general, we do not source goods outside of our published price guides, so we are able to use the benefit of the Heil Dealer network to handle these nonstandard options that are requested by the members. The Sourcewell member will specify what product or service that is not included in our published price guides and we then review those items to ensure they have provided a line item quote to the member for each request. Similarly, the situation may arise where the member has a chassis specification that our turnkey solutions do not completely satisfy. In these situations, we will request a copy of the chassis specification desired and compare it to our standard specifications. We would consider these differences to be nonstandard options and would make sure that the difference in price would not exceed 10% of the total value of a turnkey package solution. Also, these non-standard options could include fuel delivery systems. For example, the installation of a LNG (Liquid Natural Gas) engine could be quoted by the Heil dealer, and as a non-standard option, the pricing should not exceed the 10% of the turnkey package threshold per option. It is feasible that a combination of expensive options such as a LNG fuel system and body scales could exceed the 10% sourced good threshold combined, but not individually. * 58 Identify any element of the total cost of acquisition that is NOT included in the pricing submitted with your response. This includes all additional charges associated with a purchase that are not directly identified as freight or shipping charges. For example, list costs for items like pre-delivery inspection, installation, set up, mandatory training, or initial inspection. Identify any parties that impose such costs and their relationship to the Proposer. Total Cost of Acquisition costs are included in the pricing we have submitted with this Proposal. Freight or shipping charges would be identified by line item as such on the quotation to the member from the associated Heil dealer as well as any member requested additions. * 59 If freight, delivery, or shipping is an additional cost to the Sourcewell Member, describe in detail the complete freight, shipping, and delivery program. Due to varying customer locations and shipping preferences, freight is an additional cost not included in the price guide submitted in Appendix D. Freight/delivery is included in the final pricing for every Sourcewell order. The current cost for Heil arranged shipping to the local Heil dealer, including Canada, is detailed in the “Heil Drive Away Price List” attachment submitted in Appendix H. * For destinations not falling within the continental United States, the units will be delivered to the port of exit via a Heil or customer arranged delivery service and shipped via barge or ocean-going vessel to the destination. 60 Specifically describe freight, shipping, and delivery terms or programs available for Alaska, Hawaii, Canada, or any offshore delivery. Shipments to Member Agencies in Alaska and Hawaii would be handled by the local Heil Dealer who is well-versed in economically coordinating these types of shipments. Shipping requirements vary by type of product, product dimensions, and weight. For example, a refuse collection vehicle can be driven to the port of export, then shipped via container to its port of destination, and then driven to the local dealer who would perform the necessary inspections and facilitate delivery to the customer. For all product orders shipping to Alaska or Hawaii, all costs for shipping would be calculated and quoted to the customer at time of order. Shipments to our Canadian Heil Dealers are included in the Heil Drive Away Price list in Appendix H. Returns are treated the same for Hawaii and Alaska as for the other 48 states. * 61 Describe any unique distribution and/or delivery methods or options offered in your proposal. Heil’s Network comprising 34, well trained, entrepreneurial Dealers at 60 locations around the U.S. and Canada, set Heil apart in size, personnel, experience and customer focus. This network coupled with Heil’s product innovation pipeline and factory support makes the Heil brand, sales and customer service channels unique to the refuse collection vehicle market. * DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 Pricing Offered Line Item The Pricing Offered in this Proposal is: * Comments 62 c. better than the Proposer typically offers to GPOs, cooperative procurement organizations, or state purchasing departments. Option C best describes the pricing that is offered in our proposal. Heil does not hold any other cooperative purchasing contracts, nor do we have a GSA account. Our product offerings are sold through our Heil Dealer network to the individual Sourcewell members. This proposal sets a ceiling price and therefore allows the dealer to work individually with the member to get them the best price possible. Audit and Administrative Fee Line Item Question Response * 63 Specifically describe any self-audit process or program that you plan to employ to verify compliance with your proposed Contract with Sourcewell. This process includes ensuring that Sourcewell Members obtain the proper pricing, that the Vendor reports all sales under the Contract each quarter, and that the Vendor remits the proper administrative fee to Sourcewell. Heil’s self-audit process for all Sourcewell transactions will begin as soon as an order is submitted. Orders will be reviewed immediately by multiple departments to ensure all necessary documents are submitted, and complete. Prior to submitting quarterly fees to Sourcewell, the final invoice to each Sourcewell member will be reviewed to make certain the Sourcewell fee amount is in alignment with the final invoice to the Sourcewell member. In addition to Heil’s Customer Care team retaining all documents submitted with the original order, Heil will retain a copy of the final customer invoice, other applicable documents and reports. * 64 Identify a proposed administrative fee that you will pay to Sourcewell for facilitating, managing, and promoting the Sourcewell Contract in the event that you are awarded a Contract. This fee is typically calculated as a percentage of Vendor’s sales under the Contract or as a per-unit fee; it is not a line-item addition to the Member’s cost of goods. (See the RFP and template Contract for additional details.) Heil proposes an administrative fee payable to Sourcewell of 1% of the purchase price on all products, including chassis. * Industry Specific Questions Line Item Question Response * 65 If you are awarded a contract, provide a few examples of internal metrics that will be tracked to measure whether you are having success with the contract. The internal metrics that we currently utilize to measure success are related to total units sold on the contract versus a goal. We set our goal each year based on our company annual operating plan, then we measure throughout the year to be sure we are staying on target or looking for ways to address areas where we are exceeding or missing our goal. We also track the number of units sold off the contract that are turnkey solutions versus non- turnkey solutions. * 66 If your proposal does not include the chassis as a turnkey solution, propose, in detail, the process you or your dealer will follow to assist the Sourcewell member to acquire the chassis. Heil does offer a full turnkey solution, but as noted in Question 57 regarding “sourced” products, the situation may arise where the member has a chassis specification that our turnkey solutions do not completely satisfy. In these situations, we will request a copy of the chassis specification desired and compare it to our standard specifications. We would consider these differences to be nonstandard options and would make sure that the difference in price would not exceed 10% of the total value of a turnkey package solution. Similarly, chassis OEMs generally make model changes in the middle of the year and some customers prefer the newer models. We would follow the same process of comparing the chassis specifications for the current year model versus the newest model and ensure that the difference in price would not exceed 10% of the total value of a turnkey package solution. * DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 67 Explain key designs or processes your company takes to provide and promote safe operation of your equipment. For many years, the Heil company has been an active participant in the development and maintenance of the ANSI Z245.1 – Mobile Equipment safety standard which governs our industry. The chairman of this committee is a Heil Director of Engineering, and ESG is a voting corporate member of the main ANSI council with many representatives across multiple ANSI standard subcommittees. All Heil designs are compliant with ANSI 245.1, and each design change is evaluated against this standard by way of our disciplined and documented engineering change process. However, ANSI is not the only standard with which Heil ensures compliance. The company is diligent to comply with all relevant standards that cover our products. This includes: FMVSS, SAE, ISO, and NFPA52 just to name a few. Safety is our first priority and is daily topic in our daily work and conversations, followed by quality and on-time delivery. Heil also has a long-standing and extensive training program to help our customers and their end-user customers understand the required safety and maintenance practices. This is supported by way of factory training, on-site training, and on-line video resources. Heil adheres to a high standard of business ethics and is a socially responsible company committed to the safe design, manufacture, operation and service of its innovative products. * 68 Explain how your equipment in this category reduces down-time for the purchasing entity. Front Loaders • Streetwise Hydraulics, the Heil® exclusive "clean front head," relocates the hydraulic body valve from the front head to under the side of the refuse body. This design reduces the influence of exhaust heat on the hydraulic components, as well as improving access to the valve bodies. This improves safety and reliability while reducing downtime. • The Cortex controller with Insight Display - the brain or our system - is a rugged mobile controller that delivers intelligence and precision. Utilizing a mobile controller and placing it in a protected location gives us the intelligence we need and the durability our customers demand. • The Heil® Half/Pack®front-load garbage truck with Odyssey™ hydraulic controls has interlocking cross-members and long-members that form a rock solid foundation for the body, delivering unmatched durability and longevity. This allows for more uptime, longer equipment life, and a higher resale value. A load-sensing piston pump controls hydraulic flow, intelligently delivering proper oil amounts as required. This increases efficiency, reduces fuel consumption, decreases hydraulic system temperatures, and contributes to low Total Cost of Ownership. • Equipped with an Insight Display, an in-cab display that provides real-time feedback, as well as optimal operator control. The operator can look to one place for all of the information needed on the body of the truck. Also, the Insight display offers maintenance personnel advanced troubleshooting features. This not only makes the operator more efficient but also reduces downtime and maintenance. • Heil® continues to set the standard for front loader refuse trucks with the evolution of innovative new features that enhance functionality. Our patented Shur-Lock™ tailgate locks, double- walled and lapped hopper sides, and an industry-leading interlaced ladder subfloor foundation mean that your Half/Pack® front loader is built for a long, reliable lifespan. • Zinc Plated tubes – The use of zinc plated tubes eliminates corrosion, therefore reducing hydraulic leaks and prevents the need to replace components over the life of the truck. This reduces maintenance and downtime costs. • Hydraulic Tube Covers – Protects the tubes and hoses on the arms from damage • Illuminated Push Button Controls – Fully sealed and potted, easy to read and understand push button controls for body and lighting functions reduce down time by increasing reliability Rear Loaders • The patented dual-track packing system is the heart of the PowerTrak® design. Other rear load garbage trucks move shoes or rollers along a single track during sweep and pack cycles. This requires the top cylinder to operate at a sharp angle of resistance, causing intense friction that robs power and speed and increases wear on shoes and tracks. The PowerTrak® Commercials' revolutionary dual-track system gives the top cylinder its own track, significantly reducing the angle of resistance. This reduces friction and increases cycle times because more pressure is exerted directly onto the load, giving you incredibly long life from the aluminum/bronze alloy slide shoes. • The DuraPack® 5000 features the Heil® DP body, the only fully welded, interlaced subframe in a refuse collection truck. With formed channels for extra strength, high tensile strength steel to maximize performance at a minimum weight, and full welding for superior resistance to corrosion and cracking, the DuraPack® 5000 is a sturdy rear loader with the stamina to absorb years of tough refuse hauling. In addition, the Cortex controllers with Insight Display – has been integrated into the electric system to reduce downtime. By utilizing this mobile controller and placing it in protected locations, the unit becomes more reliable and with more consistent interfaces with chassis electrical systems becomes easier to diagnose and keep on route. Side Loaders • The Python® side load arm features cushioned cylinders for action that’s smooth, saving wear and tear on the lift arm and the chassis. • The Heil® Operate-in-Gear-at-Idle System comes standard on the DuraPack® Python®. It is designed to reduce wear on the lift assembly, chassis, engine, and transmission. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 • The DuraPack® Rapid Rail® automated sideloader also features Cortex with Insight Display. The "brain" of our system is a rugged mobile controller that provides the intelligence and precise control of our unit demands. Utilizing a mobile controller and placing it in a protected location gives us the intelligence we need and the durability our customers require. This allows for less downtime and ease of service. • The Heil® Liberty™ Automated Sideloader integrates our time-tested Continuous Pack body with the patented technology of the Python arm. The Continuous Pack body has been a customer favorite for more than 35 years. Our patented paddle packer design continuously sweeps the hopper, so there’s no need to stop and pack the load. And, because there’s no packer panel to slide into the body, the need for shoes, guide tracks, guide rails, and internal body parts is eliminated Multi-Compartment Vehicles • The DuraPack 4060 split-body rear loader utilizes a 40/60 two-compartment split body. Also, the DuraPack® 4060 features independent hydraulic systems enabling the pressure to be adjusted for each compartment based on the type of waste being collected CNG Capabilities • CNrG™ offers a lower profile, enabling CNG-equipped front load and side load garbage trucks to make height-sensitive routes previously closed to them. And its smart design makes it road- ready from day one and reduces the need for maintenance and the associated costs. The fully integrated CNrG™ lifts as a regular tailgate and simplifies maintenance and fueling infrastructure. The CNrG™ tailgate structure received rigorous stress analysis and testing, simulating 15 years of operation. Organics • The PT 1000® can be equipped with optional features which include: an extended hopper sill, a hopper drain with shut-off valve, extended tailgate seal, body access door seal, an extended body front head plate, and sumps. The one-piece body sidewall is easier to wash and maintain, resists rust and corrosion, and is competitively priced for adding organics collection to your fleet. • RAPIDRAIL®. Heil is now adding an Automated Organics Collection Side Load garbage truck to our unit portfolio. Rapid Rail has been specifically designed to meet the needs of organic waste collection. The Rapid Rail is equipped to be the optimal Automated Side Loader to collect organics in both the Residential and Commercial Market. The liquid-tight tailgate seal, floor mounted sealed bearing packer design, and now with optional reduced packer sweep functionality of the packer paddle make the Rapid Rail the high lift capacity, low compaction automated solution for organics collection. Available only in a dumping model to ensure optimal payload removal of the “solid organics” with an optional 3" hopper drain valve that will allow for liquid removal at specified locations. Parts Central • Heil® Certified OEM Parts are the most reliable replacement parts for Heil® refuse trucks. These parts are made following the exact specifications and production processes on the same assembly lines as the parts originally installed on the vehicles. This means they fit perfectly every time. Heil® uses only the highest-quality materials for parts that last. Parts Central also offers the most requested aftermarket parts for Heil and other makes of garbage truck bodies. Our aftermarket parts are designed and manufactured to strict standards and are backed by more than 100 years of industry experience. High-volume parts that are frequently requested are available for immediate, same-day delivery through your local Authorized Heil® Dealer. Orders for in-stock parts placed with Parts Central before 5 p.m. ET will be shipped overnight. Bayne Thinline Premium Lift Systems • Bayne's actuated lifters for mobile refuse applications feature the patented Thinline® rack and pinion rotary actuator for superior lifting capacity and outstanding reliability. These lifters, also known as cart tippers, are specifically designed to improve the efficiency of your refuse collection operation and minimize your fleet downtime. Third Eye • 3rd Eye has developed the industry leading back up truck camera systems designed to withstand shock and vibrations up to 10G, repel water intrusion, salt and handle extreme temperatures. Dealer Network Advantage • Our Heil Dealer Network comprises 60 locations to service customers. In addition to these dealer technicians, Heil also has 8 Field Service Technicians that are also available to service members if the need requires it. Support for our customers is a priority and we make it as * DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 easy as possible through our dealer locator on the Heil website, easy to access email for Heil Tech Support as well as the Heil Tech Support phone number. By utilizing the local Heil dealer network, we are able to have technicians in the vicinity to the member arrive on site quicker and further reduce the downtime. In the event that the asset must be brought into the dealership, the various locations throughout the country reduce the amount of miles that are needed to be towed to an authorized Heil dealer. 69 Describe how the equipment you propose simplifies the operation for end-users. One example is our patented Odyssey™ hydraulic control technology delivers waste industry- lea the links below of some of our customers explaining how our products simplify their operations: Environmental: viewable at https://vimeo.com/318776652 E.L Harvey: viewable at https://vimeo.com/292412920 JJ’s Waste and Recycling: viewable at https://vimeo.com/315331275 Another example is our DuraPack® Python® automated side loader. The DuraPack® Python® automated side load garbage truck combines two proven products in one high-performance package — the DuraPack® refuse body, which is famous for its toughness and productivity, and the patented Python® automated arm, which is faster, smoother, and longer lasting than any other. The DuraPack® Python® arm has an 8-second lift cycle. That can save you up to 4 seconds per stop – and up to 1 hour per day – delivering a fiscal savings of more than $15,000 per trash truck every year! You don’t have to wait for the hopper to catch up with a load, either, because the Python® follower panel enables continuous dumping. Twin packing cylinders deliver outstanding payloads, so you can collect more homes with fewer trips to the disposal site. The Python® side load arm features cushioned cylinders for action that’s smooth, saving wear and tear on the lift arm and the chassis. The Python® unique lift geometry also prevents spillage and enables the arm to return refuse carts with the lids closed every time. The Heil® Operate-in-Gear-at-Idle System comes standard on the DuraPack® Python®. It is designed to reduce wear on the lift assembly, chassis, engine, and transmission. Concerning our rearloading trucks, with over 20,000 built and nearly 30 years of reliability, the Heil® DuraPack® 5000 high-compaction rear load garbage truck has become the mainstay of refuse collection fleets. From small independent haulers to the world’s largest municipal fleet, you simply can't find a better rear load body. Engineered to last. The DuraPack® 5000 features the Heil® DP body, the only fully welded, interlaced subframe in a refuse collection truck. With formed channels for extra strength, high tensile strength steel to maximize performance at a minimum weight, and full welding for superior resistance to corrosion and cracking, the DuraPack® 5000 is a sturdy rear loader with the stamina to absorb years of tough refuse hauling. Now with the inclusion of the cortex controllers and insight display with integrated controls, the operator has more control and information at their fingertips. Heil’s new Semi-Autonomous optional control package allows for single button operation that will reduces operator inputs by 82% when dumping FEL containers. It also greatly reduces driver training time in some cases by 35% while increasing on route productivity of most drivers by up to 30%. * 70 Provide examples from your product offering that are unique in the industry. • The PowerTrak® Commercial PLUS high-compaction tag axle rear loader enables you to maximize productivity by carrying the largest legal refuse loads — up to 1,200 pounds per cubic yard! The Heil® patented design mounts the tag axle to the chassis frame rail, making it more structurally sound than refuse collection trucks with the tag axle integrated into the tailgate. • The MultiPack® is ideal for waste routes with “unlimited-at-the-curb” contracts. It’s also the perfect unit for those ugly “surprises” that unexpectedly end up next to a customer’s trash cart on collection day. Plus, while other garbage truck body manufacturers may offer multi-function trucks, only the Heil® MultiPack® is “totally functional” in both modes of operation because it can pick up a completely manual or automated route. • 3rd Eye Enhance Vehicle Behavioral Analytics (VBA™) encompasses the entire suite of camera, monitor, video, data, radar, and ELD solutions. This comprehensive package is offered ala carte to allow fleet owners to choose the systems that make sense for their current application with the built in upgrade path if and when it’s needed. 3rd Eye puts fleet owners in the driver’s seat with proven applications that help them to make better decisions to deliver the lowest total cost of ownership. 3rd Eye provides engineered body-system-sensor systems that provide real-time status and feedback for both chassis and body-related functions. Fleet owners know critical operational metrics, such as fuel consumption, operational temperatures and pressures – as well as when hydraulics are being utilized and the position of hydraulically operated body systems. This allows fleet owners to know when fuel is being used to move the vehicle vs. when the vehicle is using fuel to perform a body function [like compacting a load of garbage or lifting a man bucket]. Geo sensors allow fleet owners to know when assets are operating on road vs. off road. For the first time, fleet owners have the ability to request tax rebates for the Heavy Highway Use Tax, for fuel used during non-use fuel consumption. * • Heil’s new Semi-Autonomous optional control package allows for single button operation that will reduces operator inputs by 82% when dumping FEL containers. It also greatly reduces driver training time in some cases by 35% while increasing on route productivity of most drivers by up to 30%. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1BA1F6D8-D01E-48BF-BB8A-690BA532C766 71 If an hybrid/electric chassis option is not a part of your product offering, provide information on when a hybrid/electric option may be part of your offering. While Heil is not a chassis manufacturer, we have proven that we have product offerings that can be utilized on fully electric chassis. This year (2019), Mack Trucks unveiled its Mack® LR battery electric vehicle (BEV) at Waste Expo with a Heil DURAPACK® 5000 Rear Loader. Please click the link below for more information: https://www.macktrucks.com/mack-news/2019/mack-trucks-unveils-fully-electric-mack-lr--refuse- demonstration-model/ * 72 Describe any safety innovations on your equipment that are either exclusive or that you have introduced into the marketplace. • The Heil Co. (“Heil”) was founded in 1901 and has been an industry leader and design innovator for decades in the solid waste industry. Heil product designs comply with all safety standards and regulations applicable to our industry, and we actively innovated to improve the protection of our entire value chain, from suppliers to our customers, their customers, and the at- large population that is proximate to our machines every single day. Heil has the widest product line in the industry, including front loaders, side loaders, and rear loaders with a variety of sizes and configurations to match a multitude of on-the-street collection applications. As just one example, the Heil Odyssey Automated Front Loader allows operators to keep their eyes facing forward because the work is in front of them – in the same direction the truck is moving. This design includes features like smooth coordinated lift cycles, multiple patents like the gravity latch used to ensure the arm lift arm is secure during a dump cycle, and a combination of safety interlocks that prevent unsafe movement. Furthermore, Heil is leading the way into the future of automation by enhancing designs with smart sensors and features which relieve some of the in-cab motion stress that operators feel on a daily basis. It may be as simple as an ergonomic arm rest and multi-function joystick, or as complex as motion control design iterations that result in the lowest cab shake possible. Through a rigorous Voice of Customer program, Heil makes active outreach efforts to listens to its customers and innovates to continuously improve the safety and ergonomics of our equipment. * • The 3rd Eye family of Integrated Collision Avoidance Radar Systems offer cutting-edge solutions to protect both your drivers, your assets, and those in close proximity to your vehicle. 3rd Eye Vehicle Radar Systems assist drivers by notifying them of other vehicles as well as obstacles they may not see. Vehicles operating 3rd Eye radar systems routinely report fewer accidents and near misses and, combined with 3rd Eye camera systems – provide an added level of safety and protection that adds peace of mind – as well as providing documentary evidence to protect companies from false claims of property damage or injury. 3rd Eye collision avoidance radar systems utilize your existing 3rd Eye Mobile camera cables for easy installation. Exceptions to Terms, Conditions, or Specifications Form Only those Proposer Exceptions to Terms, Conditions, or Specifications that have been accepted by Sourcewell have been incorporated into the contract text. Documents Ensure your submission document(s) conforms to the following: 1. Documents in PDF format are preferred. Documents in Word, Excel, or compatible formats may also be provided. 2. Documents should NOT have a security password, as Sourcewell may not be able to open the file. It is your sole responsibility to ensure that the uploaded document(s) are not either defective, corrupted or blank and that the documents can be opened and viewed by Sourcewell. 3. Sourcewell may reject any response where any document(s) cannot be opened and viewed by Sourcewell. 4. If you need to upload more than one (1) document for a single item, you should combine the documents into one zipped file. If the zipped file contains more than one (1) document, ensure each document is named, in relation to the submission format item responding to. For example, if responding to the Marketing Plan category save the document as “Marketing Plan.” Financial Strength and Stability - Appendix B - 2018 Dover Annual Report.pdf - Thursday September 05, 2019 10:23:51 Marketing Plan/Samples - Appendix - Marketing samples.zip - Friday September 06, 2019 14:21:37 WMBE/MBE/SBE or Related Certificates (optional) Warranty Information (optional) Pricing - Appendix - Price lists.zip - Monday September 09, 2019 10:55:49 Additional Document - Chassis Specifications.zip - Friday September 06, 2019 14:24:44 DocuSign Envelope ID: 5E3E625A-BC0B-40FE-963B-4136BCF1B278 ŵƌĞƉDĂŶƵĨĂĐƚƵƌŝŶŐ͕>>͘ ƵƌďƚĞŶĚĞƌ͕/ŶĐ͘ ,ŽůͲDĂĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚŝŽŶ >ĂďƌŝĞ ŶǀŝƌŽƋƵŝƉ'ƌŽƵƉ DĐEĞŝůƵƐ&ŝŶĂŶĐŝĂů͕/ŶĐ͘ WĂƌͲ<ĂŶŽŵƉĂŶLJ͕>> ^ĐƌĂŶƚŽŶDĂŶƵĨĂĐƚƵƌŝŶŐŽ͘ /ŶĐ͘ dŚĞ,ĞŝůŽ͘ hŶŝǀĞƌƐĂů,ĂŶĚůŝŶŐ ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚŽŵƉĂŶLJ>ƚĚ͘ WŽƐƐŝďůĞWŽŝŶƚƐ ŽŶĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞƚŽdĞƌŵƐͬ ŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐƚŽ/ŶĐůƵĚĞ ŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶ ϱϬ ϰϰ ϰϱ ϰϮ ϰϰ ϰϰ ϰϮ ϰϱ ϰϯ ϯϰ WƌŝĐŝŶŐ ϰϬϬ Ϯϴϭ ϯϰϲ ϯϯϴ ϯϰϵ ϯϰϱ ϯϮϲ ϯϰϵ ϯϰϮ ϮϱϬ &ŝŶĂŶĐŝĂů͕/ŶĚƵƐƚƌLJĂŶĚ DĂƌŬĞƚƉůĂĐĞ^ƵĐĐĞƐƐĞƐ ϳϱ ϲϯ ϲϮ ϱϵ ϲϯ ϲϲ ϱϲ ϲϳ ϲϱ ϰϳ ŝĚĚĞƌΖƐďŝůŝƚLJƚŽ^Ğůůͬ ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞŽŶƚƌĂĐƚEĂƚŝŽŶĂůůLJ ϭϬϬ ϳϰ ϴϮ ϳϴ ϴϱ ϴϭ ϲϳ ϴϵ ϴϵ ϱϯ ŝĚĚĞƌΖƐDĂƌŬĞƚŝŶŐWůĂŶ ϱϬ ϰϯ ϰϰ ϰϬ ϰϮ ϰϭ ϯϴ ϰϲ ϰϰ ϯϯ sĂůƵĞĚĚĞĚƚƚƌŝďƵƚĞƐ ϳϱ ϲϮ ϲϳ ϱϲ ϲϯ ϲϳ ϱϱ ϲϳ ϲϳ ϰϳ tĂƌƌĂŶƚLJŽǀĞƌĂŐĞƐĂŶĚ /ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ ϱϬ ϰϱ ϰϲ ϰϰ ϰϯ ϰϯ ϰϮ ϰϰ ϰϯ ϰϮ ^ĞůĞĐƚŝŽŶĂŶĚsĂƌŝĞƚLJŽĨ WƌŽĚƵĐƚƐĂŶĚ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐKĨĨĞƌĞĚ ϮϬϬ ϭϱϯ ϭϴϱ ϭϰϰ ϭϳϴ ϭϳϴ ϭϮϭ ϭϴϮ ϭϴϱ ϭϮϱ dŽƚĂůWŽŝŶƚƐ ϭ͕ϬϬϬϳϲϱ ϴϳϳ ϴϬϭ ϴϲϳ ϴϲϱ ϳϰϳ ϴϴϵ ϴϳϴ ϲϯϭ ZĂŶŬKƌĚĞƌ ϳϯϲϰϱϴϭϮϵ <ŝŵƵƐƚŝŶ͕WW͕^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů ^ƚĞƉŚĂŶŝĞ,ĂĂƚĂũĂ͕W/D͕^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů ƌĂŶĚŽŶdŽǁŶ͕W^D͕W^͕^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů ƌĂŝŐtĞƐƚ͕^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů DŽďŝůĞZĞĨƵƐĞsĞŚŝĐůĞƐǁŝƚŚZĞůĂƚĞĚ ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚ͕ĐĐĞƐƐŽƌŝĞƐ͕ĂŶĚ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ WƌŽƉŽƐĂů ǀĂůƵĂƚŝŽŶ Z&WηϬϵϭϮϭϵ DocuSign Envelope ID: 7AF3A319-EF7F-4B23-906F-0B5BC7B06239 Proposal Opening Record Date of opening: September 12, 2019 Sourcewell posted Request for Proposal #091219, for the procurement of Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services, on the Sourcewell Procurement Portal [proportal.sourcewell-mn.gov] on Thursday, July 11, 2019, and the solicitation remained in an open status within the portal until September 12, 2019, at 4:30 pm CT. The RFP required that all proposals be submitted through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal no later than 4:30 pm CT on September 12, 2019, the date and time specified in the Solicitation Schedule. The undersigned certify that all responses received on Request for Proposal #091219 were submitted through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal, and that each Proposer’s response material was digitally sealed upon submission and remained inaccessible until the due date and time specified in the Solicitation Schedule. Responses were received from the following: Amrep Manufacturing, LLC. - received 9/12/19 at 10:36:39 AM Curbtender, Inc. - received 9/12/19 at 4:25:15 PM Hol-Mac Corporation - received 8/29/19 at 10:53:03 AM Labrie Enviroquip Group - received 9/10/19 at 2:40:37 PM McNeilus Financial, Inc. - received 9/12/19 at 3:41:33 PM Par-Kan Company, LLC - received 9/12/19 at 10:01:07 AM Scranton Manufacturing Co. Inc. - received 9/12/19 at 4:03:12 PM The Heil Co. - received 9/11/19 at 9:59:56 AM Universal Handling Equipment Company Ltd. - received 9/12/19 at 3:12:15 PM The Proposals were opened electronically, and a list of all Proposers was made publicly available in the Sourcewell Procurement Portal, on September 12, 2019, at 4:32:00 PM CT. All responsive proposals were then submitted for review by the Sourcewell Evaluation Committee. _________________________________ ________________________________ Kim Austin, Procurement Lead Analyst Brandon Town, Procurement Analyst DocuSign Envelope ID: 2851C9BA-1654-40E5-8240-7B108262A428 Sourcewell RFP #091219 Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 1 RFP #091219 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS for Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Proposal Due Date: September 12, 2019, 4:30 p.m., Central Time Sourcewell, a State of Minnesota local government agency and service cooperative, is requesting proposals for Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services to result in a national contracting solution for use by its members. Sourcewell members include thousands of governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and other public agencies located in the United States and Canada. A full copy of the Request for Proposals can be found on the Sourcewell Procurement Portal [https://proportal.sourcewell-mn.gov]. Only proposals submitted through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal will be considered. Proposals are due no later than September 12, 2019, at 4:30 p.m. Central Time, and late proposals will not be considered. Solicitation Schedule Public Notice of RFP Published: July 11, 2019 Pre-proposal Conference: August 12, 2019, 10:00 a.m., Central Time Question Submission Deadline: September 5, 2019, 4:30 p.m., Central Time Proposal Due Date: September 12, 2019 4:30 p.m., Central Time Late responses will not be considered. Opening: September 12, 2019, 6:30 p.m., Central Time ** ** SEE RFP SUB-SECTION V. G. “OPENING” Sourcewell RFP #091219 Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 2 I. ABOUT SOURCEWELL AND MEMBERS A. SOURCEWELL Sourcewell is a State of Minnesota local government agency and service cooperative created under the laws of the State of Minnesota (Minnesota Statutes Section 123A.21) that facilitates a competitive public solicitation and contract award process for the benefit of its 50,000+ members across the United States and Canada. Sourcewell’s solicitation process complies with Minnesota law and policies, and results in cooperative contracting solutions from which Sourcewell’s members procure equipment, products, and services. Cooperative contracting provides members and vendors increased administrative efficiencies and the power of combined purchasing volume that result in overall cost savings. At times, Sourcewell also partners with other purchasing cooperatives to combine the purchasing volume of their membership into a single solicitation and contract expanding the reach of contracted vendors potential pool of end users. Sourcewell uses a website-based platform, the Sourcewell Procurement Portal, through which all proposals to this RFP must be submitted. B. MEMBERS AND USE OF RESULTING CONTRACTS Membership in Sourcewell is open to government and non-profit entities across the United States and Canada; such as municipal, state/province, K-12 and higher education, tribal government, and other public entities. Access to contracted equipment, products, or services by Members is typically through a purchase order issued directly to the applicable vendor. A Member may request additional terms or conditions related to a purchase. Use of Sourcewell contracts is voluntary and Members retain the right to obtain similar equipment, products, or services from other sources. To meet Members’ needs, public notice of this RFP has been broadly published, including notification to each state-level procurement departments for possible re-posting. As required by certain states, an Appendix of Members is included in this RFP and can be found in the Sourcewell Procurement Portal. Affidavits of Publication will be available at the conclusion of the solicitation process. For Canadian entities: This RFP is intended to include municipalities and publicly-funded academic institutions, school boards, health authorities, and social services (MASH sectors); including members of the Rural Municipalities of Alberta (RMA), and their represented Associations: Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities (SARM), Saskatchewan Urban Municipalities Association (SUMA), and Association of Manitoba Municipalities (AMM). Sourcewell RFP #091219 Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 3 II. EQUIPMENT, PRODUCTS, AND SERVICES A. SOLUTIONS-BASED SOLICITATION This RFP and contract award process is a solutions-based solicitation; meaning that Sourcewell is seeking equipment, products, or services that meet the general requirements of the scope of this RFP and that are commonly desired or are required by law or industry standards. B. REQUESTED EQUIPMENT, PRODUCTS, OR SERVICES It is expected that Proposers offer a wide array of equipment, products, or services at lower prices and with better value than what they would ordinarily offer to a single government entity, a school district, or a regional cooperative. 1. Sourcewell is seeking proposals for Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services, including, but not to be limited to: a. Front-load, side-load, rear-load, and multi-compartment refuse vehicles, including hybrid or electric powered vehicles. Proposer may elect to offer a product-only solution, a turn-key solution, or an alternative solution. Generally, a turn-key solution is most desirable to Sourcewell and its Members, however, it is not mandatory or required. 2. The primary focus of this solicitation is on mobile refuse collection vehicles. Proposers may offer related equipment, accessories and services to the extent that they are complementary to mobile refuse collection vehicles: a. Technological, logistical or mechanical accessories primarily intended and designed to increase operator or vehicle safety and efficiency; b. Preventative maintenance, maintenance, and repair services. 3. This solicitation should NOT be construed to include: a. Chassis-only solutions; b. Technology-only solutions; c. Body or upfitting solutions for low speed vehicles; and d. Refuse collection services. This solicitation does not include those equipment, products, or services covered under categories included in contracts currently maintained by Sourcewell: 1. Solid Waste and Recycling Collection and Transport Equipment with Related Equipment, Supplies, and Accessories (Sourcewell RFP #041217) Sourcewell RFP #091219 Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 4 2. Grounds Maintenance Equipment, Attachments, Accessories, and Related Services (Sourcewell RFP #062117) 3. Low Speed Vehicles, Medium Speed Vehicles, and Utility Vehicles, with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Supplies (Sourcewell RFP #051717) Proposers may include related equipment, accessories, and services to the extent that these solutions are complementary to the equipment, products, or service(s) being proposed. Generally, the solutions for Sourcewell Members are turn-key solutions, providing a combination of equipment, products and services, delivery, and installation to a properly operating status. However, equipment or products only solutions may be appropriate for situations where Sourcewell Members possess the ability, either in-house or through local third-party contractors, to properly install and bring to operation those equipment/products being proposed. Sourcewell prefers vendors that provide a sole source of responsibility for the products and services provided under a resulting contract. If Proposer requires the use of dealers, resellers, or subcontractors to provide the products or services, the Proposal should address how the products or services will be provided to Members and describe the network of dealers, resellers, and/or subcontractors that will be available to serve Sourcewell Members under a resulting contract. Sourcewell desires the broadest possible selection of products/equipment and services being proposed over the largest possible geographic area and to the largest possible cross-section of Sourcewell current and potential Members. C. REQUIREMENTS It is expected that Proposers have knowledge of all applicable industry standards, laws, and regulations and possess an ability to market and distribute the equipment, products, or services to Members. 1. Safety Requirements. All items proposed must comply with current applicable safety or regulatory standards or codes. 2. Deviation from Industry Standard. Deviations from industry standards must be identified with an explanation of how the equipment, products, and services will provide equivalent function, coverage, performance, and/or related services. 3. New Equipment and Products. Proposed equipment and products must be for new, current model; however, Proposer may offer certain close-out equipment or products if it is specifically noted in the Pricing proposal. 4. Delivered and operational. Unless clearly noted in the Proposal, equipment and products must be delivered to the Member as operational. Sourcewell RFP #091219 Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 5 5. Warranty. All equipment, products, supplies, and services must be covered by a warranty that is the industry standard or better. D. ANTICIPATED CONTRACT TERM Sourcewell anticipates that the term of any resulting contract(s) will be four (4) years. An extension may be offered based on the best interests of Sourcewell and its members. E. ESTIMATED CONTRACT VALUE AND USAGE Based on past volume of similar contracts, the estimated annual value of all transactions from contracts resulting from this RFP are anticipated to be USD $90 Million; therefore, proposers are expected to propose volume pricing. Sourcewell anticipates considerable activity under the contract(s) awarded from this RFP; however, sales and sales volume from any resulting contract are not guaranteed. F. MARKETING PLAN Proposer’s sales force will be the primary source of communication with Members. The Proposer’s Marketing Plan should demonstrate Proposer’s ability to deploy a sales force or dealer network to Members, as well as Proposer’s sales and service capabilities. It is expected that Proposer will promote and market any contract award. G. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS 1. Contracts will be awarded to Proposers able to best meet the need of Members. Proposers should submit their complete line of equipment, products, or services that are applicable to the scope of this RFP. 2. Proposers should include all relevant information in its proposal. Sourcewell cannot consider information that is not provided in the Proposal. Sourcewell reserves the right to verify Proposer’s information and may request clarification from a Proposer, including samples of the proposed equipment or products. 3. Depending upon the responses received in a given category, Sourcewell may need to organize responses into subcategories in order to provide the broadest coverage of the requested equipment, products, or services to Members. Awards may be based on a subcategory. 4. A Proposer’s documented negative past performance with Sourcewell or its Members occurring under a previously awarded Sourcewell contract may be considered in the evaluation of a proposal. Sourcewell RFP #091219 Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 6 II. PRICING A. REQUIREMENTS All proposed pricing must be: 1. Either Line-Item Pricing or Percentage Discount from Catalog Pricing, or a combination of these: a. Line-item Pricing is pricing based on each individual product or services. Each line must indicate the Vendor’s published “List Price,” as well as the “Contract Price.” b. Percentage Discount from Catalog or Category is based on a percentage discount from a catalog or list price, defined as a published Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) for the products or services. Individualized percentage discounts can be applied to any number of defined product groupings. Proposers will be responsible for providing and maintaining current published MSRP with Sourcewell, and this pricing must be included in its proposal and provided throughout the term of any Contract resulting from this RFP. 2. The Proposer’s ceiling price (Ceiling price means that the proposed pricing will be considered as the highest price for which equipment, products, or services may be billed to a Member). However, it is permissible for vendors to sell at a price that is lower than the contracted price; 3. Stated in U.S., and Canadian dollars for Proposers intending to sell in Canada (as applicable); and 4. Clearly understood, complete, and fully describe the total cost of acquisition (e.g., the cost of the proposed equipment, products, and services delivered and operational for its intended purpose in the Member’s location). Proposers should clearly identify any costs that are NOT included in the proposed product or service pricing. This may include items such as installation, set up, mandatory training, or initial inspection. Include identification of any parties that impose such costs and their relationship to the Proposer. Additionally, Proposers should clearly describe any unique distribution and/or delivery methods or options offered in the Proposal. B. ADMINISTRATIVE FEES Proposers are expected to pay to Sourcewell an administrative fee in exchange for Sourcewell facilitating the resulting contracts. The administrative fee is normally calculated as a percentage of the total sales to Members for all contracted equipment, products, or services made during a calendar quarter, and is typically one percent (1%) to two percent (2%). In some categories, a flat fee may be an acceptable alternative. Sourcewell RFP #091219 Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 7 III. CONTRACT Proposers awarded a contract will be required to execute a contract with Sourcewell. Only those modifications the Proposer indicates in its proposal will be available for discussion. Much of the language in the Contract reflects Minnesota legal requirements and cannot be altered. Numerous and/or onerous exceptions that contradict Minnesota law may result in a proposal being disqualified from further review and evaluation. To request a modification to the Contract terms, conditions, or specifications, a Proposer must complete and submit an Exceptions to Terms, Conditions, or Specifications Form, with all requested modifications, through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal at the time of submitting the Proposer’s response. IV. RFP PROCESS A. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE Sourcewell will hold an optional, non-mandatory pre-proposal conference via webcast on the date and time noted on page one of this RFP and on the Sourcewell Procurement Portal. The purpose of this conference is to allow potential Proposers to ask questions regarding this RFP and Sourcewell’s competitive contracting process. Information about the webcast will be sent to all entities that requested a copy of this RFP through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal. Pre-proposal conference attendance is optional. B. QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS RFP AND ORAL COMMUNICATION Questions regarding this RFP must be submitted through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal. The deadline for submission of questions is found in the Solicitation Schedule and on the Sourcewell Procurement Portal. Answers to questions will be issued through an addendum to this RFP. Repetitive questions will be summarized into a single answer and identifying information will be removed from the submitted questions. All questions, whether specific to a Proposer or generally related to the RFP, must be submitted using this process. Do not contact individual Sourcewell staff to ask questions or request information as this may disqualify the Proposer from responding to this RFP. Sourcewell will not respond to questions submitted after the deadline. C. ADDENDA Sourcewell may modify this RFP at any time prior to the proposal due date by issuing an addendum. Addenda issued by Sourcewell become a part of the RFP and will be delivered to Sourcewell RFP #091219 Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 8 potential Proposers through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal. Sourcewell accepts no liability in connection with the delivery of any addenda. Before a proposal will be accepted through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal, all addenda, if any, must be acknowledged by the Proposer by checking the box for each addendum. It is the responsibility of the Proposer to check for any addenda that may have been issued up to the time for solicitation closing. If an addendum is issued after a Proposer submitted its proposal, the Sourcewell Procurement Portal will WITHDRAW the submission and change the Proposer’s proposal status to INCOMPLETE. The Proposer can view this status change in the “MY BIDS” section of the Sourcewell Procurement Portal Vendor Account. The Proposer is solely responsible to: i) make any required adjustments to its proposal; ii) acknowledge the addenda; and iii) Ensure the re-submitted proposal is RECEIVED through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal no later than the closing time and date shown in the Solicitation Schedule. D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION Proposer’s complete proposal must be submitted through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal no later than the date and time specified in the Solicitation Schedule. Any other form of proposal submission, whether electronic, paper, or otherwise, will not be considered by Sourcewell. Only complete proposals that are timely submitted through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal will be considered. Late proposals will not be considered. It is the Proposer’s sole responsibility to ensure that the proposal is received on time. All proposals must be received through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal no later than the Proposal Due Date and time noted in the Solicitation Schedule above. It is recommended that Proposers allow sufficient time to upload the proposal and to resolve any issues that may arise. The closing time and date is determined by the Sourcewell Procurement Portal web clock. In the event of problems with the Sourcewell Procurement Portal, follow the instructions for technical support posted in the portal. It may take up to twenty-four (24) hours to respond to certain issues. Upon successful submission of a proposal, the Portal will automatically generate a confirmation email to the Proposer. If the Proposer does not receive a confirmation email, contact Sourcewell’s support provider at support@bidsandtenders.ca. To ensure receipt of the latest information and updates via email regarding this solicitation, or if the Proposer has obtained this solicitation document from a third party, the onus is on the Sourcewell RFP #091219 Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 9 Proposer to create a Sourcewell Procurement Portal Vendor Account and register for this solicitation opportunity. All proposals must be acknowledged digitally by an authorized representative of the Proposer attesting that the information contained in in the proposal is true and accurate. By submitting a proposal, Proposer warrants that the information provided is true, correct, and reliable for purposes of evaluation for potential contract award. The submission of inaccurate, misleading, or false information is grounds for disqualification from a contract award and may subject the Proposer to remedies available by law. E. GENERAL PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS Proposals must be: • In substantial compliance with the requirements of this RFP or it will be considered nonresponsive and be rejected. • Complete. A proposal will be rejected if it is conditional or incomplete. • Submitted in English. • Valid and irrevocable for ninety (90) days following the Proposal Due Date. Any and all costs incurred in responding to this RFP will be borne by the Proposer. F. PROPOSAL WITHDRAWAL Prior to the proposal deadline, a Proposer may withdraw its proposal. G. OPENING The Opening of Proposals will be conducted electronically through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal. A list of all Proposers will be made publicly available in the Sourcewell Procurement Portal after the Proposal Due Date, but no later than the Opening time listed in the Solicitation Schedule. To view the list of Proposers, verify that the Sourcewell Procurement Portal opportunities list search is set to “All” or “Closed.” The solicitation status will automatically change to “Closed” after the Proposal Due Date and Time. V. EVALUATION AND AWARD A. EVALUATION It is the intent of Sourcewell to award one or more contracts to responsive and responsible Proposer(s) offering the best overall quality, selection of equipment, products, and services, Sourcewell RFP #091219 Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 10 and price that meet the commonly requested specifications of Sourcewell and its Members. The award(s) will be limited to the number of offerors that Sourcewell determines is necessary to meet the needs of Sourcewell members. Factors to be considered in determining the number of contracts to be awarded in any category may include the following: • The number of and geographic location of: o Proposers necessary to offer a comprehensive selection of equipment, products, or services for Members’ use. o A Proposer’s sales and service network to assure availability of product supply and coverage to meet Members’ anticipated needs. • Total evaluation scores. • The attributes of Proposers, and their equipment, products, or services, to assist Members achieve environmental and social requirements, preferences, and goals. Information submitted as part of a proposal should be as specific as possible when responding to the RFP. Do not assume Sourcewell’s knowledge about a specific vendor or product. B. AWARD(S) Award(s) will be made to the Proposer(s) whose proposal conforms to all conditions and requirements of the RFP, and consistent with the award criteria defined in this RFP. Sourcewell may request written clarification of a proposal at any time during the evaluation process. Proposal evaluation will be based on the following scoring criteria and the Sourcewell Evaluator Scoring Guide (available in the Sourcewell Procurement Portal): Conformance to RFP Requirements 50 Financial Viability and Marketplace Success 75 Ability to Sell and Deliver Service 100 Marketing Plan 50 Value Added Attributes 75 Warranty 50 Depth and Breadth of Offered Equipment, Products, or Services 200 Pricing 400 TOTAL POINTS 1000 C. PROTESTS OF AWARDS Any protest made under this RFP by a Proposer must be in writing, addressed to Sourcewell’s Executive Director, and delivered to the Sourcewell office located at 202 12th Street NE, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479. The protest must be received no later than ten (10) calendar days’ Sourcewell RFP #091219 Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 11 following Sourcewell’s notice of contract award(s) or non-award and must be time stamped by Sourcewell no later than 4:30 p.m., Central Time. A protest must include the following items: • The name, address, and telephone number of the protester; • The original signature of the protester or its representative; • Identification of the solicitation by RFP number; • A precise statement of the relevant facts; • Identification of the issues to be resolved; • Identification of the legal or factual basis; • Any additional supporting documentation; and • Protest bond in the amount of $20,000. Protests that do not address these elements will not be reviewed. D. RIGHTS RESERVED This RFP does not commit Sourcewell to award any contract and a proposal may be rejected if it is nonresponsive, conditional, incomplete, conflicting, or misleading. Proposals that contain false statements or do not support an attribute or condition stated by the Proposer may be rejected. Sourcewell reserves the right to: • Modify or cancel this RFP at any time; • Reject any and all proposals received; • Reject proposals that do not comply with the provisions of this RFP; • Select, for contracts or for discussion, a proposal other than that with the lowest cost; • Waive or modify any informalities, irregularities, or inconsistencies in the proposals received; • Discuss any aspect of the proposal with any Proposer and negotiate with more than one Proposer; • Award a contract if only one responsive proposal is received if it is in the best interest of Members; and • Award a contract to one or more Proposers if it is in the best interest of Members. E. DISPOSITION OF PROPOSALS All materials submitted in response to this RFP will become property of Sourcewell and will become public record in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 13.591, after negotiations are complete. Sourcewell determines that negotiations are complete upon execution of the resulting contract. If the Proposer submits information in response to this RFP that it believes to Sourcewell RFP #091219 Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 12 be trade secret materials, as defined by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 13.37, the Proposer must: • Clearly mark all trade secret materials in its proposal at the time the proposal is submitted; • Include a statement with its proposal justifying the trade secret designation for each item; and • Defend any action seeking release of the materials it believes to be trade secret, and indemnify and hold harmless Sourcewell, its agents and employees, from any judgments or damages awarded against Sourcewell in favor of the party requesting the materials, and any and all costs connected with that defense. This indemnification survives Sourcewell’s award of a contract. In submitting a proposal to this RFP, the Proposer agrees that this indemnification survives as long as the trade secret materials are in possession of Sourcewell. Sourcewell will not consider the prices submitted by the Proposer to be proprietary or trade secret materials. Financial information provided by a Proposer is not considered trade secret under the statutory definition. 8/9/2019 Addendum No. 1 Solicitation Number: RFP 091219 Solicitation Name: Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Consider the following Questions and Answers to be part of the above-titled solicitation documents. The remainder of the documents remain unchanged. Question 1: Is it possible to include video hyperlinks, image files, or customer testimonial documentation when responding in the Portal? Answer 1: All relevant information should be included in the proposal (RFP Section II., G.). It is left to the discretion of each proposer to determine the method it deems best suited to submit its relevant information in a timely fashion through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal. End of Addendum Acknowledgement of this Addendum to RFP 091219 distributed via email and posted to the Sourcewell Procurement Portal on 8/9/2019, is required at the time of proposal submittal. 8/16/2019 Addendum No. 2 Solicitation Number: RFP 091219 Solicitation Name: Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Consider the following Questions and Answers to be part of the above-titled solicitation documents. The remainder of the documents remain unchanged. Question 1: In what format will the proposal be reviewed by the committee? Will it be a printed out of the Sourcewell Procurement Portal or will it be reviewed online? Answer 1: All proposals must be submitted through the Sourcewell Procurement Portal. The evaluation committee has access to each proposal in a variety of formats through the Portal, any or all of which may be utilized in the discretion of the evaluation committee and its members. End of Addendum Acknowledgement of this Addendum to RFP 091219 distributed via email and posted to the Sourcewell Procurement Portal on 8/16/2019, is required at the time of proposal submittal. 8/19/2019 Addendum No. 3 Solicitation Number: RFP 091219 Solicitation Name: Mobile Refuse Collection Vehicles with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Consider the following Questions and Answers to be part of the above-titled solicitation documents. The remainder of the documents remain unchanged. Question 1: Will technical specifications regarding cab-chassis and body requirements be made available? Answer 1: Please refer to Section II, A. Solutions-Based Solicitations, within the RFP, for guidance related to the equipment, products and services requested. End of Addendum Acknowledgement of this Addendum to RFP 091219 distributed via email and posted to the Sourcewell Procurement Portal on 8/19/2019, is required at the time of proposal submittal. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00578 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-I REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:GREGORY A. BARFIELD, Director Department of Transportation BY:BRIAN BARR, Assistant Director Department of Transportation DUANE MYERS, Fleet Manager Department of Transportation, Municipal Fleet Division CLIFF TRAUGH, Senior Management Analyst Department of Transportation, Municipal Fleet Division SUBJECT Approve the award of a purchase contract to Pape Kenworth of Fresno, California, for the purchase of two Kenworth T370 water trucks in the amount of $286,830 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the award of a purchase contract to Pape Kenworth of Fresno, California, for the purchase of two Kenworth T370 water trucks in the amount of $286,830. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Department of Public Utilities (DPU),Wastewater Management Division seeks to purchase two Kenworth T370 water trucks to perform water transport,dust mitigation,and maintenance related to the wastewater treatment system.One truck will be purchased as a replacement and one as an addition through a competitively solicited cooperative procurement process administered by Sourcewell, formally the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA). BACKGROUND DPU,Wastewater Management Division is responsible for the collection and treatment of wastewater produced by the City of Fresno.This is accomplished through the operation and maintenance of the Wastewater Treatment Plant,as well as the collection system supplying it.To continue this maintenance,water trucks are needed to mitigate dust on the roads,break up algae forming in City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00578 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-I maintenance,water trucks are needed to mitigate dust on the roads,break up algae forming in canals, and flush collection lines all throughout the city. This work at the Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently done with a single aging water truck designed to spray algae off canal banks using high pressure water and coat the dirt roads to lessen the production of dust.An additional truck is needed by the collection system maintenance team for dust control at new construction sites,flushing mainlines,and supplying supplemental recycled water for larger repairs.The new trucks will be built to a specification similar to the original,updated with the latest emissions technology, exceeding the US 2010 emissions standard. The truck identified for replacement is on a 10-year or 5,000-hour replacement schedule,which has been established by the Fleet Management Division as the optimum replacement time.Currently,the truck is 12 years old and has experienced significant repairs costs,and staff recommends replacement of this unit based on age and condition.The new water truck for the collection system maintenance team will be an addition to the fleet. The trucks will be purchased through a competitively solicited cooperative procurement process administered by NJPA.The purchase price is $286,830.This price includes the Sourcewell, cooperative purchasing discount applied to City purchases,as well as sales tax at 7.975 percent.The Purchasing Division has approved this contract and recommends Council to approve.The City Attorney has reviewed and approved to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Section 15378, the award of this contract does not qualify as a project as defined by CEQA. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference is not applicable.The City is procuring the trucks through this cooperative purchase agreement. FISCAL IMPACT No general funds will be used to purchase these items.The funding to cover the purchase cost of the Kenworth T370 water trucks has been included in the FY2020 adopted budget under the operations of the DPU,Wastewater Management Division.The source of funding for this project is the Department of Transportation,Municipal Fleet Division Replacement Fund and the Wastewater Operating Fund, generated primarily by the collection of customer user fees. Attachments: Acceptance & Award Combined Ads Comment & Review Evaluation Kenworth Contract RFP City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 12-Step Procurement Process About Us Affiliations & Relationships Become a Member Get to Know NJPA - Indefinite Quantity Construction Contracting Systems and related services - Printing, Messaging, and related communications products and services - Exercise, Fitness, and Rehabilitation equipment with related accessories, services, installation, and supplies - Flooring with related equipment, products, supplies, installation, and services - Benefit/Broker Services for Program Development, Analysis, Evaluation, and Marketing of a Group Dental Insurance Program - Surplus Auction Services with Related Solutions - Medical Claims Administrative Services Specific and Aggregate Stop Loss Coverage Prescription Drug Claims Administration - Automotive and Truck Replacement Parts and Tires with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services - Class 6,7, and 8 Chassis with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Current & Pending Solicitations Vendor Reference Guide Become a Vendor Cooperative Purchasing Vendor Name * Vendor Address * Vendor City * Vendor State * Vendor Zip Code * Contact Name * Contact Email * Contact Phone Number * Submit - Class 6,7, and 8 Chassis with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services The National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of NJPA and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #081716 CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES . Details of this RFP are available beginning June 21, 2016. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Jonathan Yahn, NJPA, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479, or by e-mail at RFP@njpacoop.org. Proposals will be received until August 17, 2016 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened August 18, 2016 at 8:00 a.m. Central Time. Pre-Proposal Conference: July 27, 2016 at 10:00 am CT Sealed proposals due: August 17, 2016 at 4:30 pm CT Proposals will be publicly opened: August 18, 2016 at 8:00 am CT NJPA reserves the right to reject any and all proposals. To Obtain RFP documents do one of the following: 1. E-mail rfp@njpacoop.org, an email will be sent back to you with the documents 2. Send a letter of request to National Joint Powers Alliance: Attn: Contracts and Compliance Department 202 12th Street NE, Staples, MN 56479 3. Complete the RFP Document Request Form below, this will redirect you to a page where you can get the documents immediately. RFP Document Request Form (this will redirect you to a page to download the documents): *is a required field Home > Cooperative Purchasing >Become a Vendor >Current & Pending Solicitations > - Class 6,7, and 8 Chassis with Related Equipment, Accessories, and Services Page 1 of 2National Joint Powers Alliance :: - Class 6,7, and 8 Chassis with Related Equipment, Acc... 6/22/2016http://www.njpacoop.org/national-cooperative-contract-solutions/become-vendor/current-p... Contracts - General Contracts - Fleet Contracts - ezIQC Construction Cooperative Health Current & Pending Solicitations FAQs How to Purchase State Legal References NJPA Access for Vendors Public Sector Insured Deposit Search Vendors & Products Tribal Vendor Newsletter What Can NJPA Do For You Procurement Plaza Page 2 of 2National Joint Powers Alliance :: - Class 6,7, and 8 Chassis with Related Equipment, Acc... 6/22/2016http://www.njpacoop.org/national-cooperative-contract-solutions/become-vendor/current-p... [Go Back To Agency View] [Bid Board] Chat Help Logout Home Search Browse My Stuff Tools Bid RFP #081716 - CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES Bid Type RFP Bid Number 081716 Title CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES Start Date Jun 22, 2016 1:09:30 PM CDT End Date Aug 17, 2016 12:00:00 AM CDT Agency NJPA Bid Contact Ginger Line (218) 894-5483 ginger.line@njpacoop.org 202 12th Street NE P.O. Box 219 Staples, MN 56479-0219 Questions 0 Questions [View/Ask Questions] Description The National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of NJPA and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #081716 CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES . Details of this RFP are available beginning June 21, 2016. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Jonathan Yahn, NJPA, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479, or by e-mail at RFP@njpacoop.org. Proposals will be received until August 17, 2016 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened August 18, 2016 at 8:00 a.m. Central Time. Delivery Information Jonathan Yahn, NJPA, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479 Pre-Bid Conference Page 1 of 2Public Purchase: Bid RFP #081716 - CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED ... 6/22/2016http://www.publicpurchase.com/gems/bid/bidView?bidId=63363 Date Jul 27, 2016 10:00:00 AM CDT Location Webcast/Conference Call Notes Connection information will be sent two business days prior to event. We request that you please register with the agency before viewing the bid documents. This process takes only a couple of minutes. [Register with this agency] Documents No Documents for this bid Customer Support: vendorsupport@publicpurchase.com | Copyright 1999-2016 © | The Public Group, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 2 of 2Public Purchase: Bid RFP #081716 - CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED ... 6/22/2016http://www.publicpurchase.com/gems/bid/bidView?bidId=63363 Bid Information /∠Home ∠List of Bids Bid Information Bid Information for 081716 Bid Number 081716 Bid Name CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES Published By National Joint Powers Alliance Solicitation Type Open to all suppliers Contract Type RFP Procurement Name Procurement Published Date 06/22/2016 Closing Date 08/17/2016 04:30:00 PM CT Country & Province/State Ontario, Canada Region & City , Bid Type Goods Group Remind Notice Date Not Applicable Publish Option NIGP Code Value Range Not Applicable Accept questions N/A Tender Area NDA Requirement N/A NOI Date N/A Site Meetings N/A CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES 081716 Closing Date: 08/17/2016 04:30:00 PM CT Detail: The National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of NJPA and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #081716 CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES . Details of this RFP are available beginning June 21, 2016. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Jonathan Yahn, NJPA, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479, or by e-mail at RFP@njpacoop.org. Proposals will be received until August 17, 2016 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened August 18, 2016 at 8:00 a.m. Central Time. No Bid Document Selected Automotive/ Industrial Automotive Services Repairs and maintenance of automobiles , storage of autos, towing, trucking services, leasing, rentals, car washes/cleaning, stabilization system, wheel balancing, etc Aviation Supplies/ Services Planes, helicopters, etc., aircraft parts, aerospace engineering, pilots Heavy Equipment/ Vehicles Dump trucks, bull-dozers, cranes, asphalt rollers, etc. tractors Office trailers, skid loader, earthmovers, heavy duty vehicles, excavators, caterpillar, graders, trains etc. Industrial Vehicles/ Equipment Fire trucks, Ambulances, Transport Trucks, Garbage Trucks, Buses (school and commercial), Utility Trucks, Ride-on Lawn Mowers, decontamination trailers, streetcars, ice-resurfacers, office trailers, trains etc Passenger Vehicles Cars, Sports utility vehicles, pick-up trucks, mini vans, police cars, etc. hybrids Pending Biddingo Approval Pending Biddingo Approval Requirements Bid Advertisement Bid Document Selected Categories (Biddingo Category) Page 1 of 2Biddingo - Leading e-procurement portal for public and private sector bids 6/22/2016https://r2cow.biddingo.com/viewVerification/333392/1250642 Recreational Vehicles and Services ATV's, snowmobiles, RV's (motor homes, trailers) boats, jet-skis, boat motors, skidoos, motorcycles, bikes, rescue boats, mobile office trailers, rafts etc Tools/ Supplies/ Parts Automotive/aircraft parts/tools/lifts, etc., machine shop tools, anti-freeze, parts, car wash drive through system, pick-up caps, hoists etc Seq. Seq. Name Name Description Description Size Size Page Page NDA NDA Required Required Preview Preview Document Document No File Attached Name / Email Name / Email Address Address Phone Phone Fax Fax No Bidder Invited © Copyright 2016 R2CoW. All Rights Reserved. Powered by [ SUPPORT (Download Training Manuals) ] ABOUT SSL CERTIFICATES Attached Bid Documents Invited Bidders Page 2 of 2Biddingo - Leading e-procurement portal for public and private sector bids 6/22/2016https://r2cow.biddingo.com/viewVerification/333392/1250642 Print-friendly Version < Back CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES Disclaimer Header Reference Number PR373242 Solicitation Number 081716 Buying Organization National Joint Powers Alliance Source ID PP.CO.USA.868485.C88455 Associated Components Yes Non-disclosure Agreement Not required. Dates Published Revised Closing 2016-08-17 04:30 PM Central Daylight Saving Time CDT Details Opportunity Access Open Category Miscellaneous Goods Transportation Equipment and Spares GSINS Region of Delivery Canada Agreement Type Tender Type Request for Proposal (RFP) Estimated Value Pre-bid Meeting Optional 2016-07-27 10:00 AM Central Daylight Saving Time CDT Webcast/Conference Call Site Visit Not Applicable Bid Security Required No Page 1 of 3Request for Proposal (RFP) Abstract: CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED ... 6/22/2016https://www.merx.com/English/SUPPLIER_Menu.asp?WCE=Show&TAB=3&PORTAL=... Deadline for Bidders' Questions 2016-08-10 Notice Description CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES The National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of NJPA and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #081716 CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES . Details of this RFP are available beginning June 21, 2016. Proposals will be received until August 17, 2016 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened August 18, 2016 at 8:00 a.m. Central Time. Contact(s) Contracting Authority Name Ginger Line Address 202 12th Street NE PO Box 219 City Staples State / Province MN Country United States Postal Code 56479 Phone (218)894-1930 Fax (218)894-3045 Email ginger.line@njpacoop.org Website URL Print-friendly Version < Back Note: Web site links will be displayed when available. If you click a web site link, you will be connected to another web site. Your MERX session will timeout after 20 minutes of inactivity. Should this occur, please return to the MERX home page and log in to MERX again. © MERX - All rights reserved. No part of the information contained in the Public Tenders portion of this Web Site may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of MERX and the Minister of the participating Page 2 of 3Request for Proposal (RFP) Abstract: CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED ... 6/22/2016https://www.merx.com/English/SUPPLIER_Menu.asp?WCE=Show&TAB=3&PORTAL=... government department. MERX, the Minister nor the Contracting Authority will assume responsibility or liability for the accuracy of the information contained in the publication. Page 3 of 3Request for Proposal (RFP) Abstract: CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED ... 6/22/2016https://www.merx.com/English/SUPPLIER_Menu.asp?WCE=Show&TAB=3&PORTAL=... Avenue of Mysteries byJohn Irving (Simon & Schuster,fiction, reprint). An “enchantedand often amusing tale” (says reviewer Don Oldenburg)about a Mexican boy whogrows up to become a famousnovelist living in the USA. eeee out of four BOOKS New paperbacks from John Ir ving, Judd Apatow, Paula McLain ALSO NEWLY RELEASEDCircling the Sun by PaulaMcLain (Ballantine, fiction, reprint). Aviator Beryl Markhamis embroiled in a love triangle inthis novel set in 1920s Africa; bythe author of The Paris Wife. A Lucky Life Interrupted byTom Brokaw (Random House,non-fiction, reprint). The formerNBC News anchor writes aboutbeing diagnosed with multiplemyeloma, a blood cancer. Sick in the Head by Judd Apatow (Random House, non-fiction, reprint). The filmdirector has conversations withfunny people such as Mel Brooks,Jerry Seinfeld, Amy Schumer,Chris Rock and Lena Dunham. The Clasp by Sloane Crosley(Picador, fiction, reprint). Debutnovel about three friends in their20s and a missing necklace. The Education of Kevin Powell by Kevin Powell (Atria, non-fiction, reprint). Memoir by former Real World cast member is subtitled A Boy’s Journey Into Manhood. Primates of Park Avenueby Wednesday Martin (Simon &Schuster, non-fiction, reprint).Memoir about trying to navigatethe cutthroat world of Upper East Side moms. Finding Audrey by Sophie Kinsella (Ember, fiction, reprint).The author of the popular Shopaholic series venturesinto young-adult terrain with this story about a 14-year-old girl su ering from social anxiety. Reagan: The Life by H.W.Brands (Anchor, non-fiction,reprint). Big biography of theiconic Republican president. The Real Doctor Will See You Shortly by Matt McCarthy (Broadway, non-fiction,reprint). Subtitle: A Physician’sFirst Year; McCarthy contributesbook reviews to USA TODAY. The Cartel by Don Winslow(Vintage Crime, fiction, reprint).Novel about Mexican drug warsis inspired by true story of (now captured) Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman. The Lake House by Kate Morton (Washington SquarePress, fiction, reprint). In 1933 England, a baby vanishesfrom his crib; 70 years later, his sister, a mystery writer, is drawn back to the past by a police detective. Jocelyn McClurg Jocelyn McClurg l @jocelynmcclurg l USA TODAY EVERETT IRVINGAuthor John Irving USA TODAYWEDNESDAY, JUNE 22, 2016 LIFE 5D To view more Classified listings, visit: www.USATODAYClassifieds.com BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES BUSINESS MASSIVE WEALTH I made 1.4 million in 18 months. Will train professional business minded people only Call (800) 486-9954 (24 hrs) HEALTH/FITNESS WEB DESIGNMARKETPLACE MISCELLANEOUS Send your sales through the roof with an ad in Marketplace Today. For more information on how to place your ad call: 1-800-397-0070 NOTICES PUBLIC NOTICE MISSING NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING & EXPLOITED CHILDREN Sex:Female Race:Hispanic Hair:Brown Eyes:Brown DOB: May 20, 1999 Missing: Apr 23, 2015 Age Now:17 From:La Verne, CA 1-800-THE-LOST MYA AYALA PUZZLES ACROSS1Ancient Peruvian5Pillow prettifier9Politico Mo whowrote “Too Funny to Be President”14 Castle defense15Tightly drawn16Prefix withlogical17Words to a termpaper writer20Exceeds one’s Rx21Bone near the radius22Actress ___ DawnChong23Demonstrator’shandout25Minor malady29Spreadsheet filler30College sr.’schallenge31Fan fave32Facial adornment37Tar Heels’ sch.38 Factor indesigning road curves41NBA great ___Ming42Oxide used as anantacid43Naysayer45Like a boiled lobster46Untidy sort50Airline snack fare52Blew a gasket55“Good” cholesterol, briefly56Kunis of “Black Swan”57 “You don’t say!”58 Web designer’s work63Tuned in64Michigan town orcollege65Racetrack barrier66Pyle of Mayberry67Ollie’s comedy cohort68Noted Folies-Bergeredesigner DOWN1“Brr!”2 “Beats me!”3 Watched afriend’s tabby, say4Chowed down5Fur wrap6Inhabit, like aghost7Subtle glow8Chain units (Abbr.)9 Garden-variety10Scale starters11Athletic org. for 37-Across12Tell tall tales13___ Altos, Calif.18 Brynner of “The King and I”19 Shows theropes to24Vampire’s tooth25Come to light26Cabinet dept.27 Slim to ___ (long odds)28 Gentle attention,briefly30Monotonous job 33 Resistance unit34Catch off-guard35Barely beats36Moo goo ___ pan38With it, mentally39Wee bit40Thomas wholampoonedTweed41Mouth, slangily44Possible reply to“Where are you?”47 Sneakerbrandendorsed by rapper Tyga48Gift-giver’srequest49Bailey of thecomics51Source of milk52Mrs. Flintstone53Onlinemortgage source54Forty winks56Go soft, in away58Lose firmness59___ Jima 60 Kiltie’s cap61Anatomical duct62GI fare Answers: Call 1-900-988-8300, 99 cents a minute; or, with a credit card, 1-800-320-4280. TRIPLE ECHO CROSSWORD BY Victor Fleming Tuesday’s Answer 6/21 © Universal Uclick 6/22 CROSSWORDSONYOUR PHONEmobilegames.usatoday.com DIFFICULTYRATING Completethegridsothateveryrow,columnand3x3 boxcontainsthenumbers1through9(norepeats). 6/22 6/21 SUDOKU FUSIONONYOUR PHONEmobilegames.usatoday.com Completethegridsothateveryrow,columnand3x2 boxcontainsthenumbers1through6(norepeats). DIFFICULTYRATING 2 5 1 3 3 9 2 8 7 2 4 2 6 3 1 5 3 2 8 6 5 7 1 3 8 2 9 7 8 2 1 5 1 2 6 1 1 6 4 4 6 1 5 6 5 2 4 5 7 2 3 6 9 8 4 1 8 3 9 2 4 1 6 5 7 1 6 4 5 7 8 2 3 9 4 1 8 6 2 3 9 7 5 9 5 6 4 1 7 3 2 8 7 2 3 8 9 5 4 1 6 2 4 1 9 5 6 7 8 3 6 8 5 7 3 4 1 9 2 3 9 7 1 8 2 5 6 4 2 4 5 3 1 6 1 3 6 2 4 5 6 1 3 5 2 4 5 2 4 6 3 1 4 5 2 1 6 3 3 6 1 4 5 2 Tuesday’s Answers SUDOKU © Universal Uclick QUICKCROSS ByJohnWilmes 6/22 At a distance Employ Cookie brand Yes votes “Hello, skipper!” Discontinue employment Vicinity Classic cars Tuesday’s Answer 6/21 A S I A B O N S L U K E E L S A QUICKCROSSONYOUR PHONE mobilegames.usatoday.com © Universal Uclick PAY 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. PLAYONLINEPUZZLES.USATODAY.COM UP & DOWN WORDS ByDavidL.HoytandRussellL.Hoyt 1.Assuredofsuccess 2.CertainMonopolyspace 3.Itcomeswithafine 4.Movietheaterqueue 5.It’shithard 6.Fightoff;repel 7.Owedcompensation Clues:Tuesday’s Answer DAY JOB TITLE PAGE DOWN UNDER WRAPS JOB TITLE PAGE DOWN UNDER WRAPS UP HOME 6/22 © Universal Uclick T T H I R S T V T N S H K A R A R I E S O I Y C W S R O X Z T X A A N V T U L T U A K J S T O T P R J V O T V M T R N K A U O R L I B R A E Y L U A H T A B L E T C M E L T N S C O R P I O V O WORD ROUNDUP ByDavidL.HoytandJeffKnurek Tuesday’s answer: CENTURYSECOND MINUTE DECADE MONTH HOURWEEKYEAR DAY/ CERES PLUTO ERIS /TURTLE LIZARD SNAKE / POLISH / ELEVEN 6/22 Find and Circle: Ten words starting and ending inT Five zodiac signs Lennon and McCartney “Large,” to “big” Absolutely sure (seven-letter answer)© Universal Uclick Report puzzle problems to us at feedback@usatoday.com or 1-800-872-7073 ©WIGGLES 3D GAMESDON’T QUOTE ME® Rearrangethewordstocompletethequote.English author Anthony Burgess thinks about human behavior. ALONE LAUGH SNORE WITH WORLD YOU YOU ___________ANDTHE ___________LAUGHS ________ ________,___________AND ________SLEEP ___________. 6/22 Tuesday’sAnswer:“Ifyouwanttomakeenemies,tryto changesomething.”-WoodrowWilson Private LendersWanted HighYield Short Term Mortgages for Sale. References. CallTodd: (207)358-7528 FINANCIAL SERVICES NOTICES LEGAL NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICEPUBLIC NOTICE The Central Susquehanna Intermediate Unit (CSIU) d/b/a the Keystone Purchasing Network (KPN), a national public sector purchasing cooperative is soliciting national sealed bids for Commercial Food Service Equipment& Supplies andEducational &Classroom Furniture. The bid deadline is June 29, 2016 at 4:00 PM EST. The bids will be publicly opened on June 30, 2016, at 9:00 AM at the CSIU Main Office, 90 Lawton Lane, Milton, PA. Go to www.theKPN.org for more information. TRAVEL REAL ESTATE DISCOUNT TRAVEL AUCTIONS Discount Business ClassTravel Most International Destinations UseYour Miles or Our Miles We Buy Air Miles 850-625-7878 Real Estate AUCTION! Priest Lake, Idaho (Coolin, I 41 Deeded Lake Front Properties! Saturday, June 25th - 208-377-5700 www.CorbettBottles.com Addiction & Recovery Services TAKETHE FIRST STEPTO RECOVERY! Call Addiction Hope & Help Line & Speak with Someone Who Cares. FREE counseling & insurance assessment Get started with gentle treatment today Call 800-830-3369 UP TO 100% FINANCING, OAC FROM $63,900 Anywhere - Worldwide 100%TURNKEY $$ 1-877-500-7603 $$ WWW.DRSS9.COM OWNYOUROWN BE OPEN IN 30 DAYS START NOW! • DOLLAR STORE • 99¢ PLUS STORE • BIG BOX DOLLAR • MAIL BOX STORE • PARTY STORE • WOMEN’S ACCESSORY BOUTIQUE LEGAL NOTICE:If, at any time duringOctober 20, 2010 to May30, 2015, you made an in-person purchase in theState of California, or aninternet or phone purchasefor delivery to a Californiaaddress, of a Good Karmabrand flax milk product(including “Classic” FlaxMilk, “Protein Plus” FlaxMilk or “Flax Delight” FlaxMilk), a class action settle-ment may affect your rights.For more information, visitwww.FlaxSettlement.comor call 1-866-949-5149. The National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of NJPA and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #081716 CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES. Details of this RFP are available beginning June 21, 2016. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Jonathan Yahn, NJPA, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479, or by email at RFP@njpacoop.org. Proposals will be received until August 17, 2016 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened August 18, 2016 at 8:00 a.m. Central Time.To advertise, call: 1-800-397-0070 SET YOUR APART. Advertise with USA TODAY!800-397-0070 B R A N D (727)479-2707 |tacituspublishing.com W e bDesig nService s Ratesstartingat $30/hr 1 National Joint Powers Alliance® (herein NJPA) REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (herein RFP) for the procurement of CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES RFP Opening AUGUST 18, 2016 8:00 a.m. Central Time At the offices of the National Joint Powers Alliance® 202 12th Street Northeast, Staples, MN 56479 RFP #081716 The National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of NJPA and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #081716 CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES . Details of this RFP are available beginning June 21, 2016. Details may be obtained by letter of request to Jonathan Yahn, NJPA, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479, or by e-mail at RFP@njpacoop.org. Proposals will be received until August 17, 2016 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened August 18, 2016 at 8:00 a.m. Central Time. RFP Timeline June 22, 2016 Publication of RFP in the print and online version of USA Today, in the print and online version of the Salt Lake News within the State of Utah, in the print and online version of the Daily Journal of Commerce within the State of Oregon (note: OR entities this pertains to: http://www.njpacoop.org/oregon-advertising), in the print and online version of The State within the State of South Carolina, the NJPA website, MERX, Noticetobidders.com, PublicPurchase.com, Biddingo, and Onvia. July 27, 2016 Pre-Proposal Conference (the webcast/conference call. The 10:00 a.m. CT connection information will be sent to all inquirers two business days before the conference). August 10, 2016 Deadline for RFP questions. August 17, 2016 Deadline for Submission of Proposals. Late responses will be 4:30 p.m. CT returned unopened. August 18, 2016 Public Opening of Proposals. 8:00 a.m. CT Direct questions regarding this RFP to: Jonathan Yahn at jonathan.yahn@njpacoop.org or (218)895-4144. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. DEFINITIONS A. Contract B. Proposer C. Sourced Good of Open Market Item D. Vendor 2. ADVERTISEMENT OF RFP 3. INTRODUCTION A. About NJPA B. Joint Exercise of Powers Laws C. Why Respond to a National Cooperative Procurement Contract D. The Intent of This RFP E. Scope of This RFP F. Expectations for Equipment/Products and Services Being Proposed G. Solutions Based Solicitation 4. INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING YOUR PROPOSAL A. Inquiry Period B. Pre-Proposal Conference C. Identification of Key Personnel D. Proposer’s Exceptions to Terms and Conditions E. Proposal Format F. Questions & Answers About This RFP G. Modification or Withdrawal of a Submitted Proposal H. Proposal Opening Procedure I. NJPA’s Rights Reserved 5. PRICING A. Line-Item Pricing B. Percentage Discount From Catalog or Category C. Cost Plus a Percentage of Cost D. Hot List Pricing E. Ceiling Price F. Volume Price Discounts/ Additional Quantities G. Total Cost of Acquisition H. Sourced Equipment/Products/ Open Market Items I. Price and Product Changes J. Payment Terms K. Sales Tax L. Shipping Requesting Pricing Changes 6. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS A. Proposal Evaluation Process B. Proposer Responsiveness C. Proposal Evaluation Criteria D. Other Consideration E. Cost Comparison F. Marketing Plan G. Certificate Of Insurance H. Order Process and/or Funds Flow I. Administrative Fees J. Value Added K. Waiver of Formalities 7. POST AWARD OPERATING ISSUES A. Subsequent Agreements B. NJPA Member Sign-up Procedure C. Reporting of Sales Activity D. Audits E. Hub Partner F. Trade-Ins G. Out of Stock Notification H. Termination of a Contract resulting from this RFP 8. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDIITONS A. Advertising a Contract Resulting From This RFP B. Applicable Law C. Assignment of Contract D. List of Proposers E. Captions, Headings, and Illustrations F. Data Practices G. Entire Agreement H. Force Majeure I. Gratuities J. Hazardous Substances K. Licenses L. Material Suppliers and Sub-Contractors M. Non-Wavier of Rights N. Protests of Awards Made O. Suspension or Disbarment Status P. Affirmative Action and Immigration Status Certification Q. Severability R. Relationship of Parties 9. FORMS 10. PRE-SUBMISSION CHECKLIST 11. PRICE & PRODUCT CHANGE REQUEST FORM 12. APPENDIX A 3 1 DEFINITIONS A. CONTRACT Contract means this RFP, current pricing information, fully executed Forms C, D, F, & P from the Proposer’s response pursuant to this RFP, and a fully executed Form E (“Acceptance and Award”) with final terms and conditions. Form E will be executed after a formal award and will provide final clarification of terms and conditions of the award. B. PROPOSER A Proposer is a company, person, or entity delivering a timely response to this RFP. This RFP may also use the terms “respondent” or “proposed Vendor,” which is interchangeable with Proposer as the context allows. C. SOURCED GOOD or OPEN MARKET ITEM A Sourced Good or Open Market Item is a product within the RFP’s scope 1) that is not currently available under the Vendor’s NJPA contract, 2) that a member wants to buy under contract from an awarded Vendor, and 3) that is generally deemed incidental to the total transaction or purchase of contract items. D. VENDOR A Proposer whose response has been awarded a contract pursuant to this RFP. 4 2 ADVERTISEMENT OF RFP 2.1 NJPA advertises this solicitation: 1) in the hard copy print and online editions of the USA Today; 2) once each in Oregon’s Daily Journal of Commerce, South Carolina’s The State and Utah’s Salt Lake Tribune; 3) on NJPA’s website; and 4) on other third-party websites deemed appropriate by NJPA. Other third-party advertisers may include Onvia, PublicPurchase.com, MERX, and Biddingo. 2.2 NJPA also notifies and provides solicitation documentation to each state-level procurement departments for possible re-posting of the solicitation within their systems and at their option for future use and to meet specific state requirements. 3 INTRODUCTION A. ABOUT NJPA 3.1 The National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA) is a public agency serving as a national municipal contracting agency established under the Service Cooperative statute by Minnesota Legislative Statute §123A.21 with the authority to develop and offer, among other services, cooperative procurement services to its membership. Eligible membership and participation includes states, cities, counties, all government agencies, both public and non-public educational agencies, colleges, universities and non-profit organizations. 3.2 Under the authority of Minnesota state laws and enabling legislation, NJPA facilitates a competitive solicitation and contracting process on behalf of the needs of itself and the needs of current and potential member agencies nationally. This process results in national procurement contracts with various Vendors of products/equipment and services which NJPA Member agencies desire to procure. These procurement contracts are created in compliance with applicable Minnesota Municipal Contracting Laws. A complete listing of NJPA cooperative procurement contracts can be found at www.njpacoop.org. 3.3 NJPA is a public agency governed by publicly elected officials that serve as the NJPA Board of Directors. NJPA’s Board of Directors calls for all proposals, awards all Contracts, and holds those resulting Contracts for the benefit of its own and its Members use. 3.3.1 Subject to Approval of the NJPA Board: NJPA contracts are awarded by the action of the NJPA Board of Directors. This action is based on the open and competitive bidding process facilitated by NJPA. The evaluation and resulting recommendation is presented to the Board of Directors by the NJPA Proposal Evaluation Committee. 3.4 NJPA currently serves over 50,000 member agencies nationally. Both membership and utilization of NJPA contracts continue to expand, due in part to the increasing acceptance of Cooperative Purchasing throughout the government and education communities nationally. B. JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS LAWS 3.5 NJPA cooperatively shares those contracts with its Members nationwide through various Joint Exercise of Powers Laws or Cooperative Purchasing Statutes established in Minnesota, other states and Canadian provinces. The Minnesota Joint Exercise of Powers Law is Minnesota Statute §471.59 which states “Two or more governmental units…may jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common to the contracting parties…” This Minnesota Statute allows NJPA to serve Member agencies located in all other states. Municipal agencies nationally can participate in cooperative purchasing activities under their own state law. These laws can be found on our website at http://www.njpacoop.org/national- cooperative-contract-solutions/legal-authority/. C. WHY RESPOND TO A NATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROCUREMENT CONTRACT 5 3.6 National Cooperative Procurement Contracts create value for Municipal and Public Agencies, as well as for Vendors of products/equipment and services in a variety of ways: 3.6.1 National cooperative contracts potentially save time and effort for municipal and public agencies, who otherwise would have to solicit vendor responses to individual RFPs, resulting in individual contracts, to meet the procurement needs of their respective agencies. Considerable time and effort is also potentially saved by the Vendors who would have had to otherwise respond to each of those individual RFPs. A single, nationally advertised RFP, resulting in a single, national cooperative contract can potentially replace thousands of individual RFPs for the same equipment/products/services that might have been otherwise advertised by individual NJPA member agencies. 3.6.2 NJPA contracts offer our Members nationally leveraged volume purchasing discounts. Our contract terms and conditions offer the opportunity for Vendors to recognize individual member procurement volume commitment through additional volume based contract discounts. 3.7 State laws that permit or encourage cooperative purchasing contracts do so with the belief that cooperative efficiencies will result in lower prices, better overall value, and considerable time savings. 3.8 The collective purchasing power of thousands of NJPA Member agencies nationwide offers the opportunity for volume pricing discounts. Although no sales or sales volume is guaranteed by an NJPA Contract resulting from this RFP, substantial volume is anticipated and volume pricing is requested and justified. 3.9 NJPA and its Members desire the best value for their procurement dollar as well as a competitive price. Vendors have the opportunity to display and highlight value-added attributes of their company, equipment/products and services without constraints of a typical individual proposal process. D . THE INTENT OF THIS RFP 3.10. National contract awarded by the NJPA Board of Directors: NJPA seeks the most responsive and responsible Vendor relationship(s) to reflect the best interests of NJPA and its Member agencies. Through a competitive proposal and evaluation process, the NJPA Proposal Evaluation Committee recommends vendors for a national contract awarded by the action of the NJPA Board of Directors. NJPA’s primary intent is to establish and provide a national cooperative procurement contract that offer opportunities for NJPA and our Member agencies to procure quality product/equipment and services as desired and needed. The contracts will be marketed nationally through a cooperative effort between the awarded vendor(s) and NJPA. Contracts are expected to offer price levels reflective of the potential and collective volume of NJPA and the nationally established NJPA membership base. 3.11 Beyond our primary intent, NJPA further desires to: 3.11.1 Award a four-year contract with a fifth-year contract option resulting from this RFP. Any fifth-year extension is exercised at NJPA’s discretion and results from NJPA’s contracting needs or from Member requests; this extension is not intended merely to accommodate an awarded Vendor’s request. If NJPA grants a fifth-year extension, it may also terminate the contract (or cause it to expire) within the fifth year if the extended contract is replaced by a resolicited or newly solicited contract. In exigent circumstances, NJPA may petition NJPA’s Board of Directors to extend the contract term beyond five years. This rarely used procedure should be employed only to avoid a gap in contract coverage while a replacement contract is being solicited; 6 3.11.2 Offer and apply any applicable technological advances throughout the term of a contract resulting from this RFP; 3.11.3 Deliver “Value Added” aspects of the company, equipment/products and services as defined in the “Proposer’s Response”; 3.11.4 Deliver a wide spectrum of solutions to meet the needs and requirements of NJPA and NJPA Member agencies; and 3.11.5 Award an exclusive contract to the most responsive and responsible vendor when it is deemed to be in the best interest of NJPA and the NJPA Member agencies. 3.12 Exclusive or Multiple Awards: Based on the scope of this RFP and on the responses received, NJPA may award either an exclusive contract or multiple contracts. In some circumstances, a single national supplier may best meet the needs of NJPA Members; in other situations, multiple vendors may be preferred. NJPA retains sole discretion to determine which approach is in the best interests of NJPA Member agencies. 3.13 Non-Manufacturer Awards: NJPA reserves the right to make an award under this RFP to a non- manufacturer or dealer/distributor if such action is in the best interests of NJPA and its Members. 3.14 Manufacturer as a Proposer: If the Proposer is a manufacturer or wholesale distributor, the response received will be evaluated on the basis of a response made in conjunction with that manufacturer’s authorized dealer network. Unless stated otherwise, a manufacturer or wholesale distributor Proposer is assumed to have a documented relationship with their dealer network where that dealer network is informed of, and authorized to accept, purchase orders pursuant to any Contract resulting from this RFP on behalf of the manufacturer or wholesale distributor Proposer. Any such dealer will be considered a sub-contractor of the Proposer/Vendor. The relationship between the manufacturer and wholesale distributor Proposer and its dealer network may be proposed at the time of the submission if that fact is properly identified. 3.15 Dealer/Reseller as a Proposer: If the Proposer is a dealer or reseller of the products and/or services being proposed, the response will be evaluated based on the Proposer’s authorization to provide those products and services from their manufacturer. When requested by NJPA, Proposers must document their authority to offer those products and/or services. E. SCOPE OF THIS RFP 3.16 Scope: The scope of this RFP is to award a contract to a qualifying vendor defined as a manufacturer, provider, or dealer/distributor, established as a Proposer, and deemed responsive and responsible through our open and competitive proposal process. Vendors will be awarded contracts based on the proposal and responders demonstrated ability to meet the expectations of the RFP and demonstrate the overall highest valued solutions which meet and/or exceed the current and future needs and requirements of NJPA and its Member agencies nationally within the scope of CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES. 3.17 Additional Scope Definitions: For purposes of the scope of this solicitation: 3.17.1 In addition to CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES, this solicitation should be read to include, but not to be limited to: 3.17.1.1 Chassis and cabs as classified by the following gross vehicle weight ratings (GVWR): Class 6 – 19,001 to 26,000 lbs.; Class 7 – 26,001 to 33,000 lbs.; Class 8 – 33,001+ lbs. 7 3.17.2 NJPA reserves the right to limit the scope of this solicitation for NJPA and current and potential NJPA member agencies. 3.17.2.1 1) Proposers may include Class 4 and Class 5 chassis in their response provided that these two classes are merely complementary to the Proposer’s Class 6-8 offering. 2) Proposers may include “related equipment, accessories, and services” in their response to the extent that these solutions are an incidental portion of their proposal. The primary focus of this solicitation is on chassis manufacturing and not on a Proposer’s ability to provide turnkey solutions by upfitting a chassis for a particular purpose. 3) This RFP should not be construed to include responses that contain school buses or city transit vehicles. Any portions of a response including such solutions will be disregarded. 3.18 Overlap of Scope: When considering equipment/products/services, or groups of equipment/ products/services submitted as a part of your response, and whether inclusion of such will fall within a “Scope of Proposal,” please consider the validity of an inverse statement. 3.18.1 For example, pencils and post-it-notes can generally be classified as office supplies and office supplies generally include pencils and post-it-notes. 3.18.2 In contrast, computers (PCs and peripherals) can generally be considered office supplies; however, the scope of office supplies does not generally include computer servers and infrastructure. 3.18.3 In conclusion: With this in mind, individual products and services must be examined individually by NJPA, from time to time and in its sole discretion, to determine their compliance and fall within the original “Scope” as intended by NJPA. 3.19 Best and Most Responsive – Responsible Proposer: It is the intent of NJPA to award a Contract to the best and most responsible and responsive Proposer(s) offering the best overall quality and selection of equipment/products and services meeting the commonly requested specifications of the NJPA and NJPA Members, provided the Proposer’s Response has been submitted in accordance with the requirements of this RFP. Qualifying Proposers who are able to anticipate the current and future needs and requirements of NJPA and NJPA member agencies; demonstrate the knowledge of any and all applicable industry standards, laws and regulations; and possess the willingness and ability to distribute, market to and service NJPA Members in all 50 states are preferred. NJPA requests proposers submit their entire product line as it applies and relates to the scope of this RFP. 3.20 Sealed Proposals: NJPA will receive sealed proposal responses to this RFP in accordance with accepted standards set forth in the Minnesota Procurement Code and Uniform Municipal Contracting Law. Awards may be made to responsible and responsive Proposers whose proposals are determined in writing to be the most advantageous to NJPA and its current or qualifying future NJPA Member agencies. 3.21 Use of Contract: Any Contract resulting from this solicitation shall be awarded with the understanding that it is for the sole convenience of NJPA and its Members. NJPA and/or its members reserve the right to obtain like equipment/products and services solely from this contract or from another contract source of their choice or from a contract resulting from their own procurement process. 3.22 Awarded Vendor’s interest in a contract resulting from this RFP: Awarded Vendors will be able to offer to NJPA, and current and potential NJPA Members, only those products/equipment and services specifically awarded on their NJPA Awarded Contract(s). Awarded Vendors may not offer as “contract compliant,” products/equipment and services which are not specifically identified and priced in their NJPA Awarded Contract. 8 3.23 Sole Source of Responsibility- NJPA desires a “Sole Source of Responsibility” Vendor. This means that the Vendor will take sole responsibility for the performance of delivered equipment/products/ services. NJPA also desires sole responsibility with regard to: 3.23.1 Scope of Equipment/Products/Services: NJPA desires a provider for the broadest possible scope of products/equipment and services being proposed over the largest possible geographic area and to the largest possible cross-section of NJPA current and potential Members. 3.23.2 Vendor use of sub-contractors in sourcing or delivering equipment/product/services: NJPA desires a single source of responsibility for equipment/products and services proposed. Proposers are assumed to have sub-contractor relationships with all organizations and individuals whom are external to the Proposer and are involved in providing or delivering the equipment/products/services being proposed. Vendor assumes all responsibility for the equipment/products/services and actions of any such Sub- Contractor. Suggested Solutions Options include: 3.24.1 Multiple solutions to the needs of NJPA and NJPA Members are possible. Examples could include: 3.24.1.1 Equipment/Products Only Solution: Equipment/Products Only Solution may be appropriate for situations where NJPA or NJPA Members possess the ability, either in- house or through local third party contractors, to properly install and bring to operation those equipment/products being proposed. 3.24.1.2 Turn-Key Solutions: A Turn-Key Solution is a combination of equipment/products and services that provides a single price for equipment/products, delivery, and installation to a properly operating status. Generally this is the most desirable solution because NJPA and NJPA Members may not possess, or desire to engage, personnel with the necessary expertise to complete these tasks internally or through other independent contractors 3.24.1.3 Good, Better, Best: Where appropriate and properly identified, Proposers may offer the choice “of good, better, best” multiple-grade solutions to meet NJPA Members’ needs. 3.24.1.4 Proven – Accepted – Leading-Edge Technology: Where appropriate and properly identified, Proposers may provide a spectrum of technology solutions to complement or enhance the proposed solutions to meet NJPA Members’ needs. 3.24.2 If applicable, Contracts will be awarded to Proposer(s) able to deliver a proposal meeting the entire needs of NJPA and its Members within the scope of this RFP. NJPA prefers Proposers submit their complete product line of products and services described in the scope of this RFP. NJPA reserves the right to reject individual, or groupings of specific equipment/products and services proposals as a part of the award. 3.25 Geographic Area to be Proposed: This RFP invites proposals to provide CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES to NJPA and NJPA Members throughout the entire United States and possibly internationally. Proposers will be expected to express willingness to explore service to NJPA Members located abroad; however the lack of ability to serve Members outside of the United States will not be cause for non-award. The ability and willingness to serve Canada, for instance, will be viewed as a value-added attribute. 3.26 Contract Term: At NJPA’s option, a Contract resulting from this RFP will become effective either on the date awarded by the NJPA Board of Directors or on the day following the expiration date of an existing NJPA procurement contract for the same or similar product/equipment and services. 9 3.26.1 NJPA is seeking a Contract base term of four years as allowed by Minnesota Contracting Law. Full term is expected. However, one additional one-year renewal/extension may be offered by NJPA to Vendor beyond the original four year term if NJPA deems such action to be in the best interests of NJPA and its Members. NJPA reserves the right to conduct periodic business reviews throughout the term of the contract. 3.27 Minimum Contract Value: NJPA anticipates considerable activity resulting from this RFP and subsequent award; however, no commitment of any kind is made concerning actual quantities to be acquired. NJPA does not guarantee usage. Usage will depend on the actual needs of the NJPA Members and the value of the awarded contract. 3.28 [This section is intentionally blank.] 3.29 Contract Availability: This Contract must be available to all current and potential NJPA Members who choose to utilize this NJPA Contract to include all governmental and public agencies, public and private primary and secondary education agencies, and all non-profit organizations nationally. 3.30 Proposer’s Commitment Period: In order to allow NJPA the opportunity to evaluate each proposal thoroughly, NJPA requires any response to this solicitation be valid and irrevocable for ninety (90) days after the date proposals are opened. F. EXPECTATIONS FOR EQUIPMENT/PRODUCTS AND SERVICES BEING PROPOSED 3.31 Industry Standards: Except as contained herein, the specifications or solutions for this RFP shall be those accepted guidelines set forth by the CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES industry, as they are generally understood and accepted within that industry across the nation. Submitted products/equipment, related services, and their warranties and assurances are required to meet and/or exceed all current, traditional and anticipated needs and requirements of NJPA and its Members. 3.31.1 Deviations from industry standards must be identified by the Proposer and explained how, in their opinion, the equipment/products and services they propose will render equivalent functionality, coverage, performance, and/or related services. Failure to detail all such deviations may comprise sufficient grounds for rejection of the entire proposal. 3.31.2 Technical Descriptions/Specifications. Excessive technical descriptions and specifications that unduly enlarge the proposal response may cause NJPA to reduce the evaluation points awarded on Form G. Proposers must supply sufficient information to: 3.31.2.1 demonstrate the Proposer’s knowledge of industry standards; 3.31.2.2 identify the equipment/products and services being proposed; and 3.31.2.3 differentiate equipment/products and services from others. 3.32 New Current Model Equipment/Products: Proposals submitted shall be for new, current model equipment/products and services with the exception of certain close-out products allowed to be offered on the Proposer’s “Hot List” described herein. 3.33 Compliance with laws and standards: All items supplied on this Contract shall comply with any current applicable safety or regulatory standards or codes. 10 3.34 Delivered and operational: Products/equipment offered herein are to be proposed based upon being delivered and operational at the NJPA Member’s site. Exceptions to “delivered and operational” must be clearly disclosed in the “Total Cost of Acquisition” section of the proposal. 3.35 Warranty: The Proposer warrants that all products, equipment, supplies, and services delivered under this Contract shall be covered by the industry standard or better warranty. All products and equipment should carry a minimum industry standard manufacturer’s warranty that includes materials and labor. The Proposer has the primary responsibility to submit product specific warranty as required and accepted by industry standards. Dealer/Distributors agree to assist the purchaser in reaching a solution in a dispute over warranty’s terms with the manufacturer. Any manufacturer’s warranty that is effective past the expiration of the warranty will be passed on to the NJPA member. Failure to submit a minimum warranty may result in non-award. 3.36 Additional Warrants: The Proposer warrants that all products/equipment and related services furnished hereunder will be free from liens and encumbrances; defects in design, materials, and workmanship; and will conform in all respects to the terms of this RFP including any specifications or standards. In addition, Proposer/Vendor warrants the products/equipment and related services are suitable for and will perform in accordance with the ordinary use for which they are intended. G. SOLUTIONS-BASED SOLICITATION 3.37 The NJPA solicitation and contract award process is not based on detailed specifications. Instead, this RFP is a “Solutions-Based Solicitation.” NJPA expects respondents to understand and anticipate the current and future needs of NJPA and its members—within the scope of this RFP—and to propose solutions that are commonly desired or required by law or industry standards. Proposal will be evaluated in part on your demonstrated ability to meet or exceed the needs and requirements of NJPA and our member agencies within the defined scope of this RFP. 3.38 While NJPA does not typically provide product and service specifications, the RFP may contain scope refinements and industry-specific questions. Where specific items are specified, those items should be considered the minimum required, which the proposal can exceed in order to meet Members’ needs. NJPA may award all of the respondent’s proposal or may limit the award to a subset of the proposal. 4 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING YOUR PROPOSAL A. INQUIRY PERIOD 4.1 The inquiry period begins on the date of first advertisement and continues until to the Deadline for Submission.” RFP packages will be distributed to potential Vendors (or respondents?) during the inquiry period. B. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE 4.2 A pre-proposal conference will be held at the date and time specified in the timeline on page one of this RFP. Conference information will be sent to all potential Proposers, and attendance is optional. The purpose of this conference is to allow potential Proposers to ask questions regarding this RFP and NJPA’s competitive contracting process. Only answers issued in writing by NJPA to questions asked before or during the pre-proposal conference are binding on the parties to an awarded contract. C. IDENTIFICATION OF KEY PERSONNEL 4.3 Awarded Vendors will designate one senior staff member to represent the Vendor to NJPA. This contact person will correspond with members for technical assistance, questions, or concerns that may arise, including instructions regarding different contacts for different geographical areas or product lines. 11 4.4 These designated individuals should also act as the primary contact for marketing, sales, and any other area deemed essential by the Proposer and NJPA. D. PROPOSER’S EXCEPTIONS TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS 4.5 Any exceptions, deviations, or contingencies regarding this RFP that a Proposer requests must be documented on Form C, Exceptions To Proposal, Terms, Conditions And Solutions Request. 4.6 Exceptions, deviations or contingencies requested in the Proposer’s response, while possibly necessary in the view of the Proposer, may result in lower scoring or disqualification of a proposal. E. PROPOSAL FORMAT 4.7 All Proposers must examine the entire RFP package to seek clarification of any item or requirement that may not be clear and to check all responses for accuracy before submitting a proposal. 4.8 All proposals must be properly labeled and sent to “The National Joint Powers Alliance, 202 12th Street NE Staples, MN 56479.” 4.9 All proposals must be physically delivered to NJPA at the above address with all required hard copy documents and signature forms/pages inserted as loose pages at the front of the Vendor’s response. The proposal must include these items. 4.9.1 Hard copy original of completed, signed, and dated Forms C, D, F; hard copy of the signed signature-page only from Forms A and P from this RFP; 4.9.2 Signed hard copies of all addenda issued for the RFP; 4.9.3 Hard copy of Certificate of Insurance verifying the coverage identified in this RFP; and 4.9.4 A complete copy of your response on a flash drive (or other approved electronic means). The electronic copy must contain completed Forms A, B, C, D, F, and P, your statement of products and pricing (including apparent discount), and all appropriate attachments. In order to ensure that your full response is evaluated, you must provide an electronic version of any material that you provide in a hard copy format. As a public agency, NJPA’s proposals, responses, and awarded contracts are a matter of public record, except for such data that is classified as nonpublic. Accordingly, public data is available for review through a properly submitted public records request. To redact nonpublic information from your proposal (under Minnesota Statute §13.37), you must make your request within thirty (30) days of the contract award or non-award date. 4.10 All Proposal forms must be submitted in English and must be legible. All appropriate forms must be executed by an authorized signatory of the Proposer. Blue ink is preferred for signatures. 4.11 Proposal submissions should be submitted using the electronic forms provided. Proposers that use alternative documents are responsible for ensuring that the content is substantially similar to the NJPA form and that the document is readable by NJPA. 4.12 The Proposer must ensure that the proposal is in the physical possession of NJPA before the submission deadline. 4.12.1 Proposals must be submitted in a sealed envelope or box properly addressed to NJPA and prominently identifying the proposal number, proposal category name, the message “Hold for Proposal Opening,” and the deadline for proposal submission. NJPA is not responsible for 12 untimely proposals. Proposals received by the deadline for proposal submission will be opened and the name of each Proposer and other appropriate information will be publicly read. 4.13 Proposers are responsible for checking directly with the NJPA website for any addendums to this RFP. Addendums to this RFP can change the terms and conditions of the RFP, including the proposal submission deadline. F. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THIS RFP 4.14 Upon examination of this RFP document, Proposer should promptly notify NJPA of any ambiguity, inconsistency, or error they may discover. Interpretations, corrections, and changes to this RFP will be considered by NJPA through a written addendum. Interpretations, corrections, or changes that are made in any other manner are not binding, and Proposers must not rely on them. 4.15 Submit all questions about this RFP, in writing, referencing CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES to Jonathan Yahn at NJPA 202 12th Street NE, Staples, MN 56479 or to RFP@njpacoop.org. You may also call Jonathan Yahn at (218) 895- 4144. NJPA urges potential Proposers to communicate all concerns well in advance of the submission deadline to avoid misunderstandings. Questions received within seven (7) days before the submission deadline generally cannot be answered. NJPA may, however, field purely procedural questions, questions about NJPA-issued addenda, or questions involving a Proposer withdrawing its response before the RFP submission deadline. 4.16 If NPJA deems that its answer to a question has a material impact on other potential Proposers or on the RFP itself, NJPA will create an addendum to this RFP. 4.17 If NJPA deems that its answer to a question merely clarifies the existing terms and conditions and does not have a material impact on other potential Proposers or the RFP itself, no further documentation of that question is required. 4.18 Addenda are written instruments issued by NJPA that modify or interpret the RFP. All addenda issued by NJPA become a part of the RFP. Addenda will be delivered to all Potential Proposers using the same method of delivery of the original RFP material. NJPA accepts no liability in connection with the delivery of any addenda. Copies of addenda will also be made available on the NJPA website at www.njpacoop.org (under “Current and Pending Solicitations”) and from the NJPA offices. All Proposers must acknowledge their receipt of all addenda in their proposal response. 4.19 Any amendment to a submitted proposal must be in writing and must be delivered to NJPA by the RFP submission deadline. 4.20 through 4.21 [These sections are intentionally blank.] G. MODIFICATION OR WITHDRAWAL OF A SUBMITTED PROPOSAL 4.22 A submitted proposal must not be modified, withdrawn, or cancelled by the Proposer for a period of ninety (90) days following the date proposals were opened. Before the deadline for submission of proposals, any proposal submitted may be modified or withdrawn by notice to the NJPA Contracts and Compliance Manager. Such notice must be submitted in writing and must include the signature of the Proposer. The notice must be delivered to NJPA before the deadline for submission of proposals and must be so worded as not to reveal the content of the original proposal. The original proposal will not be physically returned to the potential Proposer until after the official proposal opening. Withdrawn proposals may be resubmitted up to the time designated for the receipt of the proposals if they fully conform with the proposal instructions. H. PROPOSAL OPENING PROCEDURE 13 4.23 Sealed and properly identified responses for this RFP entitled CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES will be received by Jonathan Yahn, Contracts and Compliance Manager, at NJPA Offices, 202 12th Street NE, Staples, MN 56479 until the deadline identified on page one of this RFP. All Proposal responses must be submitted in a sealed package. The outside of the package must plainly identify CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES and the RFP number. To avoid premature opening, the Proposer must label the Proposal response properly. NJPA documents the receipt of proposals by immediately time- and date-stamping them with an atomic clock. At the time of the public opening, the NJPA Director of Contracts and Marketing or a representative from the NJPA Proposal Evaluation Committee will read the Proposer’s names aloud and will determine whether each submission has met Level-1 responsiveness. I. NJPA’S RIGHTS RESERVED 4.24 NJPA may exercise the following rights with regard to the RFP. 4.24.1 Reject any and all proposals received in response to this RFP; 4.24.2 Disqualify any Proposer whose conduct or proposal fails to conform to the requirements of this RFP; 4.24.3 Duplicate without limitation all materials submitted for purposes of RFP evaluation, and duplicate all public information in response to data requests regarding the proposal; 4.24.4 Consider and accept for evaluation a late modification of a proposal if 1) the proposal itself was submitted on time, 2) the modifications were requested by NJPA, and 3) the modifications make the terms of the proposal more favorable to NJPA or its members; 4.24.5 Waive any non-material deviations from the requirements and procedures of this RFP; 4.24.6 Extend the Contract, in increments determined by NJPA, not to exceed a total Contract term of five years; 4.24.7 Cancel the Request for Proposal at any time and for any reason with no cost or penalty to NJPA; 4.24.8 Correct or amend the RFP at any time with no cost or penalty to NJPA. If NJPA corrects or amends any segment of the RFP after submission of proposals and before the announcement of the awarded Vendor, all proposers will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to revise their proposals in order to accommodate the RFP amendment and the new submission dates. NJPA will not be liable for any errors in the RFP or other responses related to the RFP; and 4.24.9 Extend proposal due dates. 5 PRICING 5.1 NJPA requests that potential Proposers respond to this RFP only if they are able to offer a wide array of products and services at lower prices and with better value than what they would ordinarily offer to a single government agency, a school district, or a regional cooperative. 5.2 This RFP requests pricing for an indefinite quantity of products or related services with potential national sales distribution and service. While most RFP categories represent significant sales opportunities, NJPA makes no guarantees about the quantity of products or services that members will purchase. The estimated annual value of this contract is $40 Million. This is a new contract category for NJPA, but this 14 conservative estimate is based on heavy chassis sales from an existing NJPA contract, which is not specifically a chassis contract. It is also based on the enormous potential in the government sector for chassis sales through a national cooperative purchasing contract. This estimate also factors in the likelihood of sales increasing throughout the length of the four-year contract. As distribution networks embrace the contract, sales during the latter portion of the contract could well exceed this average annual estimate. 5.3 Regardless of the payment method selected by NJPA or an NJPA member, the total cost associated with any purchase option of the products and services must always be disclosed in the proposal and at the time of purchase. 5.4 All proposers must submit “Primary Pricing” in the form of either “Line-Item Pricing,” or “Percentage Discount from Catalog Pricing,” or a combination of these pricing strategies. Proposers are also encouraged to offer optional pricing strategies such as “Hot List,” “Sourced Products,” and “Volume Discounts,” as well as financing options such as leasing. All pricing documents should include a clear effective date. A. LINE-ITEM PRICING 5.5 Line-item pricing is a pricing format in which individual products or services are offered at specific Contract prices. Products or services are individually priced and described by characteristics such as manufacture name, stock or part number, size, or functionality. This method of pricing may offer the least amount of confusion, but Proposers with a large number of items may find this method cumbersome. In these situations, a percentage discount from catalog or category pricing model may make more sense and may increase the clarity of the contract pricing format. 5.6 All line-item pricing items must be numbered, organized, sectioned (including SKUs, when applicable), and prepared to be easily understood by the Evaluation Committee and members. 5.7 Submit Line-Item Pricing items in an Excel spreadsheet format and include all appropriate identification information necessary to discern the line item from other line items in each Responder’s proposal. 5.8 Line-item pricing must be submitted to NJPA in a searchable spreadsheet format (e.g., Microsoft® Excel®) in order to facilitate quickly finding any particular item of interest. For that reason, Proposers are responsible for providing the appropriate product and service identification information along with the pricing information that is typically found on an invoice or price quote for such product or services. 5.9 All products or services typically appearing on an invoice or price quote must be individually priced and identified on the line-item price sheet, including any and all ancillary costs. 5.10 Proposers should provide both a published “List Price” as well as a “Proposed Contract Price” in their pricing matrix. Published List Price will be the standard “quantity of one” price currently available to government and educational customers, excluding cooperative and volume discounts. B. PERCENTAGE DISCOUNT FROM CATALOG OR CATEGORY 5.11 This pricing model involves a specific percentage discount from a catalog or list price, defined as a published Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) for the products or services being proposed. 5.12 Individualized percentage discounts can be applied to any number of defined product groupings. 5.13 A percentage discount from MSRP may be applied to all elements identified in MSRP, including all manufacturer options applicable to the products or services. 5.14 When a Proposer elects to use “Percentage Discount from Catalog or Category,” Proposer will be responsible for providing and maintaining current published MSRP with NJPA, and this pricing must be included in its proposal and provided throughout the term of any Contract resulting from this RFP. 15 C. COST PLUS A PERCENTAGE OF COST 5.15 “Cost plus a percentage of cost” as a primary pricing mechanism is not desirable. It is, however, acceptable for pricing sourced goods or services. D. HOT LIST PRICING 5.16 Where applicable, a Vendor may opt to offer a specific selection of products or services, defined as “Hot List” pricing, at greater discounts than those listed in the standard Contract pricing. All product and service pricing, including the Hot List Pricing, must be submitted electronically in a format that is acceptable to NJPA. Hot List pricing must be submitted in a line-item format. Products and services may be added or removed from the Hot List at any time through an NJPA Price and Product Change Form. 5.17 Hot List program and pricing may also be used to discount and liquidate close-out and discontinued products and services as long as those close-out and discontinued items are clearly labeled as such. Current ordering process and administrative fees apply. This option must be published and made available to all NJPA Members. E. CEILING PRICE 5.18 Proposal pricing is to be established as a ceiling price. At no time may the proposed products or services be offered under this Contract at prices above this ceiling price without a specific request and approval by NJPA. Contract prices may be reduced at any time, for example, to reflect volume discounts or to meet the needs of an NJPA Member. 5.19 [This section is intentionally blank.] F. VOLUME PRICE DISCOUNTS / ADDITIONAL QUANTITIES 5.20 through 5.23 [These sections are intentionally blank.] G. TOTAL COST OF ACQUISITION 5.24 The Total Cost of Acquisition for the equipment/products and related services being proposed, including those payable by NJPA Members to either the Proposer or a third party, is the cost of the proposed equipment/products product/equipment and related services delivered and operational for its intended purpose in the end-user’s location. For example, if you are proposing equipment/products FOB Proposer’s dock, your proposal should reflect that the contract pricing does not provide for delivery beyond Proposer’s dock, nor any set-up activities or costs associated with those delivery or set-up activities. Any additional costs for delivery and set-up should be clearly disclosed. In contrast, a proposal could state that there are no additional costs of acquisition if the product is delivered to and operational at the end-user’s location. H. SOURCED GOOD or OPEN MARKET ITEM 5.25 A Sourced Good or an Open Market Item is a product that a member wants to buy under contract that is not currently available under the Vendor’s NJPA contract. This method of procurement can be satisfied through a contract sourcing process. Sourcing options serve to provide a more complete contract solution to meet our members’ needs. Sourced items are generally deemed incidental to the total transaction or purchase of contract items. 5.26 NJPA or NJPA Members may request products, equipment, and related services that are within the related scope of this RFP, even if they are not included in an awarded Vendor’s line-item price list or catalog. These items are known as Sourced Goods or Open Market Items. 16 5.27 An awarded Vendor may source such items to the extent that the items are identified as “Sourced Products/Equipment” or “Open Market Items” on any quotation issued in reference to an NJPA awarded contract, and that this information is provided to either NJPA or an NJPA Member. NJPA is not responsible for determining whether a Sourced Good is an incidental portion of the overall purchase or whether a Member is able to consider a Sourced Good a purchase under an NJPA contract. 5.28 “Cost plus a percentage” pricing is an acceptable option in pricing of Sourced Goods. I. PRODUCT & PRICE CHANGES 5.29 Awarded Vendors may request product or service changes, additions, or deletions at any time throughout the contract term. All requests must be made in written format by completing the NJPA Price and Product Change Request Form (located at the end of this RFP and on the NJPA website), signed by an authorized Vendor representative. All changes are subject to review and approval by NJPA. Submit your requests through email to your assigned Contract Manager and to PandP@njpacoop.org. 5.30 NJPA will determine whether the request is both within the scope of the original RFP and in the best interests of NJPA and NJPA Members. Approved Price and Product Change Request Forms will be returned to the Vendor contact through email. 5.31 The Vendor must 1) complete this change request form and individually list or attach all items subject to change, 2) provide a sufficiently detailed explanation and documentation for the change, and 3) include a compete restatement of pricing document in appropriate format (preferably Excel). The pricing document must identify all products and services being offered and must conform to the following NJPA product and price change naming convention: (Vendor Name) (NJPA Contract #) (effective pricing date); for example, “COMPANY 012411-CPY effective 02-12-2016.” 5.32 The new pricing restatement must include all products and services offered, even for those items whose pricing remains unchanged, and must include a new effective date on the pricing documents. This requirement reduces confusion by providing a single, current pricing sheet for each vendor and creates a historical record of pricing. 5.33 ADDITIONS. New products and related services may be added to a Contract resulting from this RFP at any time during that Contract term to the extent that those products and related services are within the scope of this RFP. Allowable new products and related services generally include updated models of products and enhanced services that reflect new technology and improved functionality. 5.34 DELETIONS. New products and related services may be deleted from a contract if an item is no longer available. 5.35 PRICE CHANGES. A Vendor may request pricing changes by providing reasonable justification for the change. For example, a request for a 3% increase in a product line that relies heavily on petroleum products may be reasonable if the raw cost of required petroleum products has increased substantially. Conversely, a request for a 3% increase in prices based only on a 3% increase in a cost-of-living index may be considered unreasonable. Although NJPA is sensitive to the possibility of fluctuations in raw material costs, prospective Vendors should make every reasonable attempt to account for normal cost changes by proposing pricing that will be effective throughout the duration of the four-year Contract. 5.35.1 Price decreases: NJPA expects Vendors to propose their very best prices and anticipates price reductions that are due to advancement in technology and marketplace efficiencies. 5.35.2 Price increases: A Vendor must include reasonable documentation for price-increase requests, along with both current and proposed pricing. Appropriate documentation should be attached to the Price and Product Change Request Form, including letters from suppliers announcing price increases. Price increases must not exceed the industry standard. 17 5.36 through 5.37 [These sections are intentionally blank.] 5.38 Proposers representing multiple manufacturers, or carrying multiple related product lines may also request the addition of new manufacturers or product lines to their Contract to the extent they remain within the scope of this RFP. 5.39 through 5.43 [These sections are intentionally blank.] K. SALES TAX 5.44 Sales and other taxes should not be included in the prices quoted. The Vendor will charge state and local sales and other applicable taxes on items for which a valid tax-exemption certification has not been provided. Each NJPA Member is responsible for providing verification of tax-exempt status to the Vendor. When ordering, NJPA Members must indicate that they are tax-exempt entities. Except as set forth herein, no party is responsible for taxes imposed on another party as a result of or arising from the transactions under a Contract resulting from this RFP. L. SHIPPING 5.45 Shipping costs can constitute a significant portion of the overall cost of procurement. Consequently, significant weight will be given to the quality of a prospective Vendor’s shipping program. Shipping charges should reasonably reflect the actual cost of shipping. NJPA understands that Vendors may use other shipping cost methods for simplicity or for transparency. But to the extent that shipping costs are determined to disproportionately increase a Vendor’s profit, NJPA may reduce the points awarded in the “Pricing” criteria. 5.46 through 5.47 [These sections are intentionally blank.] 5.48 All shipping and restocking fees must be identified in the price program. Certain industries providing made-to-order products may not allow returns. Proposals will be evaluated not only on the actual costs of shipping, but on the relative flexibility extended to NJPA Members relating to restocking fees, shipping errors, customized shipping requirements, the process for rejecting damaged or delayed shipments, and similar subjects. 5.49 through 5.50 [These sections are intentionally blank.] 5.51 Delivered products must be properly packaged. Damaged products may be rejected. If the damage is not readily apparent at the time of delivery, the Vendor must permit the products to be returned within a reasonable time at no cost to NJPA or NJPA Member. NJPA and NJPA Members reserve the right to inspect the products at a reasonable time subsequent to delivery where circumstances or conditions prevent effective inspection of the products at the time of delivery. 5.52 The Vendor must deliver Contract-conforming products in each shipment and may not substitute products without the express approval from NJPA or the NJPA Member. 5.53 NJPA reserves the right to declare a breach of Contract if the Vendor intentionally delivers substandard or inferior products that are not under Contract and described in its paper or electronic price lists or sourced upon request of any Member under this Contract. In the event of the delivery of nonconforming products, the NJPA Member will notify the Vendor as soon as possible and the Vendor will replace nonconforming products with conforming products that are acceptable to the NJPA member. 18 5.54 Throughout the term of the Contract, Proposer agrees to pay for return shipment on products that arrive in a defective or inoperable condition. Proposer must arrange for the return shipment of the damaged products. 5 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS A. PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS 6.1 The NJPA proposal evaluation committee will evaluate proposals received based on a 1,000 point evaluation system. The committee establishes both the evaluation criteria and designates the relative weight of each criterion by assigning possible scores for each category on Form G of this RFP. The committee may adjust the relative weight of the criteria for each RFP. (For example, if the “Warranty” criterion does not apply to a particular RFP, the points normally awarded under “Warranty” may be used to increase the number of potential points in another evaluation category or categories.) The “Pricing” criterion will contain at least a plurality of points for every RFP. 6.2 NJPA uses a scoring system that gives primary importance to “Pricing.” But pricing includes more than just the absolute lowest initial cost of purchasing, for example, a particular product. Other considerations include the total cost of the acquisition and whether the Proposer’s offering represents the best value. The evaluation committee may consider such factors as life-cycle costs, total cost of ownership, quality, and the suitability of an offering in meeting NJPA Members’ needs. Pricing points may be awarded based on pricing clarity and ease of use. NJPA may also award points based on whether a response contains exceptions, exclusions, or limitations of liabilities. 6.3 The NJPA Board of Directors will consider making awards to the selected Proposer(s) based on the recommendations of the proposal evaluation committee. To qualify for the final evaluation, a Proposer must have been deemed responsive as a result of the criteria set forth under “Proposer Responsiveness,” found just below. B. PROPOSER RESPONSIVENESS 6.4 All responses are evaluated for Level-One and Level-Two Responsiveness. If a response does not substantially conform to substantially all of the terms and conditions in the solicitation, or if it requires unreasonable exceptions, it may be considered nonresponsive. 6.5 All proposals must contain suitable responses to the questions in the proposal forms. The following requirements must be satisfied in order to meet Level-One Responsiveness, which is typically ascertained on the proposal opening date. If these standards are not met, your response may be disqualified as nonresponsive. 6.6 Level-One Responsiveness means that the response 6.6.1 is received before the deadline for submission or it will be returned unopened; 6.6.2 is properly addressed and identified as a sealed proposal with a specific RFP number and an opening date and time; 6.6.3 contains a pricing document (with apparent discounts) and all other forms fully completed, even if “not applicable” is the answer; 6.6.4 includes the original (hard copy) completed, dated, and signed RFP forms C, D, and F. In addition, the response must include the hard-copy signed signature page only from RFP Forms A and P and, if applicable, all signed addenda that have been issued in relation to this RFP; 19 6.6.5 contains an electronic (CD, flash drive, or other suitable) copy of the entire response; and 6.7 Level-Two Responsiveness (including whether the response is within the RFP’s scope) is determined while evaluating the remaining items listed under Proposal Evaluation Criteria below. These items are not arranged in order of importance. Each item draws from multiple questions, and a Proposer’s responses may affect scoring in multiple evaluation criteria. For example, the answers to Industry-Specific Questions may help determine scoring relative to a Proposer’s marketplace success, ability to sell and service nationwide, and financial strength. Any questions not answered without an explanation will likely result in a loss of points and may lead to a nonaward if the proposal evaluation committee cannot effectively review your response. C. PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA 6.8 Forms A and P include a series of questions that address the following categories: 6.8.1 Company Information and Financial Strength 6.8.2 Industry Requirements and Marketplace Success 6.8.3 Ability to Sell and Deliver Service Nationwide 6.8.4 Marketing Plan 6.8.5 Other Cooperative Procurement Contracts 6.8.6 Value-Added Attributes 6.8.7 Payment Terms and Financing Options 6.8.8 Warranty 6.8.9 Equipment/Products/Services 6.8.10 Pricing and Delivery 6.8.11 Industry-Specific Questions 6.9 [This section is intentionally blank.] D. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 6.10 In evaluating RFP responses, NJPA has no obligation to consider information that is not provided in the Proposer’s response. NJPA may, however, consider additional information outside the Proposer’s response. This research may include such sources as the Proposer’s website, industry publications, listed references, and user interviews. 6.11 NJPA may organize RFP responses into separate classes or subcategories, depending on the range of responses. For example, NJPA might receive numerous submissions for “Widgets and Related Products and Services.” NJPA may organize these responses into subcategories, such as manufacturers of fully operational Widgets, manufacturers of component parts for Widgets, and providers of parts and service for Widgets. NJPA reserves the right to award Proposers in some or all of such subcategories without regard to the evaluation score given to Proposers in another subcategory. This specifically allows NJPA to award Vendors that might not have, for instance, the breadth of products of Proposers in another subcategory, but that nonetheless meet a substantial and articulated need of NJPA Members. 6.12 [This section is intentionally blank.] 6.13 NJPA reserves the right to request and test equipment/products and related services and to seek clarification from Proposers. Before the Contract award, the Proposer must furnish the requested 20 information within three (3) days (or within another agreed-to time frame) or provide an explanation for the delay along with a requested time frame for providing the requested information. Proposers must make reasonable efforts to supply test products promptly. All Proposer products remain the property of the Proposer, and NJPA will return such products after the evaluation process. NJPA may make provisional contract awards, subject to a Proposer’s proper response to a request for information or products. 6.14 A Proposer’s past performance under previously awarded contracts to schools, governmental agencies, and not-for-profit entities is relevant in evaluating a Proposer’s current response. Past performance includes the Proposer’s record of conforming to published specifications and to standards of good workmanship, as well as the Proposer’s history for reasonable and cooperative behavior and for commitment to Member satisfaction. Incumbency as an awarded Vendor does not, by itself, merit positive consideration for a future Contract award. 6.15 NJPA reserves the right to reject any or all proposals. E. COST COMPARISON 6.16 NJPA may use a variety of evaluation methods, including cost comparisons of specific products. NJPA reserves the right to use this process when the proposal evaluation committee determines that this will help to make a final determination. 6.17 This direct cost comparison process will award points for being low to high Proposer for each cost evaluation item selected. A “Market Basket” of identical (or substantially similar) equipment/products and related services may be selected by the proposal evaluation committee, and the unit cost will be used as a basis for determining the point value. NJPA will select the “Market Basket” from all appropriate product categories as determined by NJPA. F. MARKETING PLAN 6.18 A Proposer’s marketing plan is a critical component of the RFP response. An awarded Vendor’s sales force will likely be the primary source of communication with NJPA Members and will directly affect the contract’s success. Marketing success depends on communicating the contract’s value, knowing the contract thoroughly, and communicating the proper use of contracted products and services to the end user. Much of the success and sales reward is a direct result of the commitment to the contract by the awarded Vendor’s sales teams. NJPA reserves the right to deem a Proposer Level-Two nonresponsive or not to award a contract based on an unacceptable or incomplete marketing plan. 6.19 NJPA marketing expectations include the following components. 6.19.1 An awarded Vendor must demonstrate the ability to deploy a national sales force or dealer network. The best RFP responses demonstrate the ability to sell, deliver, and service products through acceptable distribution channels to NJPA members in all 50 states. Proposers’ responses should fully demonstrate their sales and service capabilities, should outline their national sales force network (both numerically geographically), and should describe their method of distribution of the offered products and related services. Service may be independent of the product sales pricing, but NJPA encourages related services to be a part of Proposers’ response. Despite its preference for awarding contracts to Vendors that demonstrate nationwide sales and service, NJPA reserves the right to award contracts that meet specific Member needs locally or regionally. 6.19.2 Proposers are invited to demonstrate their ability to successfully market, promote, and communicate the benefits of an NJPA contract to current and potential Members nationwide. NJPA desires a marketing plan that communicates the value of the contract to as many Members as possible. 21 6.19.3 Proposers are expected to be receptive to NJPA trainings. Awarded Vendors must provide an appropriate training venue for both management and the sales force. NJPA commits to providing training on all aspects of communicating the value of the awarded contract, including the authority of NJPA to offer the contract to its Members, the value and utility the contract delivers to NJPA Members, the scope of NJPA Membership, the authority of Members to use NJPA procurement contracts, the preferred marketing and sales methods, and the successful use of specific business sector strategies. 6.19.4 Awarded Vendors are expected to demonstrate a commitment to fully embrace the NJPA contract. Proposers should identify both the appropriate levels of sales management and sales force that will need to understand the value of the NJPA contract, as well as the internal procedures needed to deliver the appropriate messaging to NJPA Members. NJPA will provide a general schedule and a variety of methods describing when and how those individuals should be trained. 6.19.5 Proposers should outline their proposed involvement in promoting an NJPA contract through applicable industry trade show exhibits and related customer meetings. Proposers are encouraged to consider participation with NJPA at NJPA-endorsed national trade shows. 6.19.6 Proposers must exhibit the willingness and ability to actively market and develop contract- specific marketing materials including the following items. 6.19.6.1 Complete Marketing Plan. Proposers must submit a marketing plan outlining how they will launch the NJPA contract to current and potential NJPA Members. NJPA requires awarded Vendors to embrace and actively promote the contract in cooperation with the NJPA. 6.19.6.2 Printed Marketing Materials. Awarded Vendors will produce and maintain full color print advertisements in camera-ready electronic format, including company logos and contact information to be used in the NJPA directory and other approved marketing publications. 6.19.6.3 Contract announcements and advertisements. Proposers should outline in the marketing plan their anticipated contract announcements, advertisements in industry periodicals, and other direct or indirect marketing activities promoting the awarded NJPA contract. 6.19.6.4 Proposer’s Website. Proposers should identify how an awarded Contract will be displayed and linked on the Proposer’s website. An online shopping experience for NJPA Members is desired whenever possible. 6.19.7 An NJPA Vendor contract launch will be scheduled during a reasonable time frame after the award and held at the NJPA office in Staples, MN unless the Vendor and NJPA agree to a different location. 6.20 Proposer shall identify their commitment to develop a sales/communication process to facilitate NJPA membership and establish status of current and potential agencies/members. Proposer should further express their commitment to capturing sufficient member information as is deemed necessary by NJPA. G. CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE 6.21 Proposers must provide evidence of liability insurance coverage identified below in the form of a Certificate of Insurance (COI) or an ACORD binder form with their proposal. Upon an award issued under this RFP and before the execution of any commerce relating to such award, the awarded Vendor must provide verification, in the form of a Certificate of Insurance, identifying the coverage required below and 22 identifying NJPA as a “Certificate Holder.” The Vendor must maintain such insurance coverage at its own expense throughout the term of any contract resulting from this solicitation. 6.22 Any exceptions or assumptions to the insurance requirements must be identified on Form C of this RFP. Exceptions and assumptions will be considered as part of the evaluation process. Any exceptions or assumptions that Proposers submit must be specific. If a Proposer does not include specific exceptions or assumptions when submitting the proposal, NJPA will typically not consider any additional exceptions or assumptions during the evaluation process. Upon contract award, the awarded Vendor must provide the Certificate of Insurance identifying the coverage as specified. 6.23 Insurance Liability Limits. The awarded Vendor must maintain, for the duration of its contract, $1.5 million in general liability insurance coverage or general liability insurance in conjunction with an umbrella for a total combined coverage of $1.5 million. Work on the Contract will not begin until after the awarded Vendor has submitted acceptable evidence of the required insurance coverage. Failure to maintain any required insurance coverage or an acceptable alternative method of insurance will be deemed a breach of contract. 6.23.1 Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance. An awarded Vendor must provide coverage with limits of liability not less than those stated below. An excess liability policy or umbrella liability policy may b e used to meet the minimum liability requirements provided that the coverage is written on a “following form” basis. 6.23.1.1 Commercial General Liability—Occurrence Form Policy shall include bodily injury, property damage and broad form contractual liability and XCU coverage. 6.23.1.2 Each Occurrence $1,500,000 6.24 Insurance Requirements: The limits listed in this RFP are minimum requirements for this Contract and in no way limit any indemnity covenants contained in this Contract. NJPA does not warrant that the minimum limits contained herein are sufficient to protect the Vendor from liabilities that might arise out of the performance of the work under this Contract by the Vendor, its agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors, and the Vendor is free to purchase additional insurance as may be determined necessary. 6.25 Acceptability of Insurers: Insurance is to be placed with insurers duly licensed or authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota and with an “A.M. Best” rating of not less than A- VII. NJPA does not warrant that the above required minimum insurer rating is sufficient to protect the Vendor from potential insurer solvency. 6.26 Subcontractors: Vendors’ certificate(s) must include all subcontractors as additional insureds under its policies, or the Vendor must furnish to NJPA separate certificates for each subcontractor. All coverage for subcontractors are be subject to the minimum requirements identified above. H. ORDER PROCESS AND/OR FUNDS FLOW 6.27 NJPA Members typically issue a purchase order directly to a Vendor under a Contract resulting from this RFP. Alternatively, a separate contract may be created to facilitate acquiring products or services offered in response to this RFP. Nothing in this Contract restricts the Member and Vendor from agreeing to add terms or conditions to a purchase order or a separate contract provided that such terms or conditions must not be less favorable to NJPA’s Members. 6.28 [This section is intentionally blank.] I. ADMINISTRATIVE FEES 23 6.29 Vendors will pay to NJPA an administrative fee in exchange for NJPA facilitating this Contract with its current and potential Members. NJPA may grant a conditional contract award to a Proposer if the proposed administrative fee is unclear, inadequate, or unduly burdensome for NJPA to administer. Sales under this Contract should not be processed until the parties resolve the administrative fee issue. 6.29.1 The administrative fee is typically calculated as a percentage of the dollar volume of all products and services by NJPA Members under this Contract, including anything represented to NJPA Members as falling under this Contract. 6.29.2 The administrative fee is included in, and not added to, the pricing included in Proposer’s response to the RFP. Awarded Vendors must not charge NJPA Members more that permitted in the then current price list in order to offset the administrative fee. 6.29.3 The administrative fee is designed to cover the costs of NJPA’s involvement in contract management, facilitating marketing efforts, Vendor training, and any order processing tasks relating to the Contract. Administrative fees may also be used for other purposes as allowed by Minnesota law. 6.29.4 The administrative fee under this Contract cam be expressed as a percentage of total contract sales or as a per-unit amount. While NJPA does not dictate the particular fee percentage, we require that the Proposer articulate a specific fee in its response. For example, merely stating that “we agree to pay an administrative fee” is considered nonresponsive. NPJA acknowledges that the administrative fee percentage may differ between vendors, industries, and responses. 6.29.5 NJPA awarded Vendors are responsible for paying the administrative fee at least quarterly and for generating all related reporting. Vendors agree to cooperate with NJPA in auditing these reports to ensure that the administrative fee is paid on all items purchased under the Contract. 6.30 through 6.32 [This section is intentionally blank.] J. VALUE–ADDED ATTRIBUTES 6.33 Desirability of Value-Added Attributes: Value-added attributes in an RFP response will be given positive consideration in NJPA’s evaluation process. Such attributes may increase the benefit of a product or service by improving functionality, performance, maintenance, manufacturing, delivery, energy efficiency, ordering, or other items while remaining within the scope of this RFP. 6.34 Women and Minority Business Enterprise (WMBE), Small Business, and Other Favored Businesses: Some NJPA Members give formal preference to certain types of vendors or contractors. Proposers should document WMBE (or other) status for both their organization and for any affiliates (e.g., supplier networks) involved in fulfilling the terms of this RFP. The ability of a Proposer to provide preferred business entity “credits” to NJPA and NJPA Members under a Contract will be evaluated positively by NJPA and reflected in the “value added” area of the evaluation. 6.35 Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Opportunities: Many NJPA Members consider the environmental impact of the products and services they purchase. “Green” characteristics demonstrated by Proposers will be evaluated positively by NJPA and reflected in the “value added” area of the evaluation. Please identify any green characteristics of any offering in your proposal and identify the sanctioning body determining that characteristic. Where appropriate, please indicate which products have been certified as green and by which certifying agency. 6.36 Online Requisitioning Systems: When applicable, online requisitioning systems will be viewed as a value-added characteristic. Proposers should demonstrate how their system makes online ordering easier for NJPA Members, including how Members could integrate their current e-Procurement or enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems into the Proposer’s ordering process. 24 6.37 Financing: The ability of the Proposer to provide financing solutions to Members for the products and services being proposed will be viewed as a value-added attribute. 6.38 Technology: Technological advances that appreciably improve the proposed products or services will be considered value-added attributes. K. WAIVER OF FORMALITIES 6.39 NJPA reserves the right to waive minor formalities (or to accept minor irregularities) in any proposal, when it determines that considering the proposal may be in the best interest of its Members. 6 POST-AWARD OPERATING ISSUES A. SUBSEQUENT AGREEMENTS 7.1 Purchase Order. Purchase orders for products and services may be executed between NJPA Members and the awarded Vendor (or Vendor’s sub-contractors) under this Contract. NJPA Members and Vendors must indicate on the face of such purchase orders that “This purchase order is issued under NJPA contract #XXXXXX” (insert the relevant contract number). Purchase order flow and procedure will be developed jointly between NJPA and an awarded Vendor after an award is made. 7.2 Governing Law. Purchase orders must be construed in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of a competent jurisdiction with respect to the Member. (See also Section 8.5 of this RFP.) All provisions required by law to be included in the purchase order should be read and enforced as if they were included. If through mistake or otherwise any such provision is not included, then upon application of either party the Contract shall be physically amended to make such inclusion or correction. The venue for any litigation arising out of disputes related to purchase order will be a court of competent jurisdiction with respect to the Member. 7.3 Additional Terms and Conditions. Additional terms and conditions to a purchase order may be proposed by NJPA, NJPA Members, or Vendors. Acceptance of these additional terms and conditions is optional to all parties to the purchase order. One purpose of these additional terms and conditions is to address job- or industry-specific requirements of law such as prevailing wage legislation. Additional terms and conditions may also include specific local policy requirements and standard business practices of the issuing Member or the Vendor. Such additional terms and conditions are not considered valid to the extent that they interfere with the general purpose, intent, or currently established terms and conditions contain in this RFP document. For example, a Vendor and Member may agree to add a “net 30” payment requirement to the purchase order instead of applying a “net 10” requirement. But the added terms and conditions must not be less favorable to the Member unless NJPA, the Member, and the Vendor agree to a Contract amendment or similar modification. 7.4 Specialized Service Requirements. In the event that the NJPA Member desires service requirements or specialized performance requirements (such as e-commerce specifications, specialized delivery requirements, or other specifications and requirements) not addressed in the Contract resulting from this RFP, the NJPA Member and the Vendor may enter into a separate, standalone agreement, apart from a Contract resulting from this RFP. Any proposed service requirements or specialized performance requirements require pre-approval by the Vendor. Any separate agreement developed to address these specialized service or performance requirements is exclusively between the NJPA Member and Vendor. NJPA, its agents, and employees shall not be made a party to any claim for breach of such agreement. Product sourcing is not considered a service. NJPA Members will need to conduct procurements for any specialized services not identified as a part of or within the scope of the awarded Contract. 7.5 Performance Bond. At the request of the Member, a Vendor will provide all performance bonds typically and customarily required in their industry. These bonds will be issued pursuant to the requirements of purchase orders for products and services. If a purchase order is cancelled for lack of a 25 required performance bond by the member agency, NJPA recommends that the current pending purchase order be canceled. Each Member has the final decision on purchase order continuation. Any performance bonding required by the Member, the Member’s state laws, or by local policy is to be mutually agreed upon and secured between the Vendor and the Member. 7.6 Asset Management Contracts: Asset Management-type Contracts can be initiated under a Contract resulting from this RFP at any time during the term of this Contract. Such a contract could involve, for example, picking up, storing, repairing, inventorying, salvaging, and delivery products falling within the scope of this Contract. The intention in using Asset Management Contracts is to promote the long-term efficiency of NJPA’s contracts by (among other things) extending the use and re-use of products. Asset Management Contracts cannot be created under this Contract unless they are executed within the authorized term of a Contract resulting from this RFP. The actual term of the Asset Management Contract may, however, extend beyond the expiration date of this Contract. B. NJPA MEMBER SIGN-UP PROCEDURE 7.6 Awarded Vendors are responsible for familiarizing their sales and service forces with the various forms of NJPA membership documentation and will encourage and assist potential Members in establishing membership with NJPA. NJPA membership is available at no cost, obligation, or liability to the Member or the Vendor. C. REPORTING OF SALES ACTIVITY 7.7 Awarded Vendors must report at least quarterly the total gross dollar volume of all products and services purchased by NJPA Members as it applies to this RFP and Contract. This report must include the name and address of the purchasing agency, Member number, amount of purchase, and a description of the items purchased. 7.7.1 Zero sales reports: Awarded Vendors must provide a quarterly Contract sales report regardless of the amount of sales. D. AUDITS 7.8 NJPA relies substantially on the reasonable auditing efforts of both Members and awarded Vendors to ensure that Members are obtaining the products, services, pricing, and other benefits under all NJPA contracts. Nonetheless, the Vendor must retain and make available to NJPA all order and invoicing documentation related to purchases that Members make from the Vendor under the awarded Contract. NJPA must not request such information more than once per calendar year, and NJPA must make such requests in writing with at least fourteen (14) days’ notice. NJPA may employ an independent auditor at its own expense or conduct an audit on its own. In either event, the Vendor agrees to cooperate fully with NJPA or its agents in order to ensure compliance with this Contract. E. HUB PARTNER 7.9 Hub Partner: NJPA Members may request special services through a “Hub Partner” for the purpose of complying with a law, regulation, or rule that an NJPA Member deems to apply in its jurisdiction. Hub Partners may bring value to the proposed transactions through consultancy, through qualifying for disadvantaged business entity credits, or through other means. 7.10 Hub Partner Fees: NJPA Members are responsible for any transaction fees, costs, or expenses that arise under this Contract for special service provided by the Hub Partner. The fees, costs, or expenses levied by the Hub Vendor must be clearly itemized in the transaction documentation. To the extent that the Vendor stands in the chain of title during a transaction resulting from this RFP, the documentation must clearly indicate that the transaction is “Executed for the Benefit of [NJPA Member name].” 26 F. TRADE-INS 7.11 The value in US Dollars for Trade-ins will be negotiated between NJPA or an NJPA Member, and an Awarded Vendor. That identified “Trade-In” value shall be viewed as a down payment and credited in full against the NJPA purchase price identified in a purchase order issued pursuant to any Awarded NJPA procurement contract. The full value of the trade-in will be consideration. G. OUT OF STOCK NOTIFICATION 7.12 The Vendor must immediately notify NJPA Members when they order an out-of-stock item. The Vendor must also tell the Member when the item will be available and whether there are equivalent substitutes. The Member must have the option of accepting the suggested substitute or canceling the item from the order. Under no circumstance may the Vendor make unauthorized substitutions. Unfilled or substituted items must be indicated on the packing list. H. CONTRACT TERMINATION FOR CAUSE AND WITHOUT CAUSE 7.13 NJPA reserves the right to cancel all or any part of this Contract if the Vendor fails to fulfill any material obligation, term, or condition as described in the following procedure. Before any such termination for cause, the NJPA will provide written notice to the Vendor, an opportunity to respond, and a reasonable opportunity to cure the breach. The following are some examples of material breaches. 7.13.1 The Vendor provides products or services that do not meet reasonable quality standards and that are not remedied under the warranty; 7.13.2 The Vendor fails to ship the products or to provide the services within a reasonable amount of time; 7.13.3 NJPA reasonably believes that the Vendor will not or cannot perform to the requirements or expectations of the Contract, NJPA issues a request for assurance, and the Vendor fails to respond; 7.13.4 The Vendor fails to fulfill any of the material terms and conditions of the Contract; 7.13.5 The Vendor fails to follow the established procedure for purchase orders, invoices, or receipt of funds as established by NJPA and the Vendor; 7.13.6 The Vendor fails to properly report quarterly sales; 7.13.7 The Vendor fails to actively market this Contract within the guidelines provided in this RFP and defined in the NJPA contract launch. 7.14 Upon receipt of the written notice of breach, the Vendor will have ten (10) business days to provide a satisfactory response to NJPA. If the Vendor fails to reasonably address all issues in the written notice, NJPA may terminate the Contract immediately. If NJPA allows the Vendor more time to remedy the breach, such forbearance does not limit NJPA’s authority to immediately terminate the Contract for continued breaches for which notice was given to the Vendor. Termination of the Contract for cause does not relieve either party of the financial, product, or service obligations incurred before the termination. 8.2 [This section is intentionally blank.] 7.16 NJPA may terminate the Contract if the Vendor files for bankruptcy protection or is acquired by an independent third party. The Vendor must disclose to NJPA any litigation, bankruptcy, or suspensions/disbarments that occur during the Contract period. Failure to disclose such information authorizes NJPA to immediately terminate the Contract. 27 7.17 NJPA may terminate the Contract without cause by giving the Vendor sixty (60) days’ written notice of termination. Termination of the Contract without cause does not relieve either party of the financial, product, or service obligations incurred before the termination. 7.18 NJPA may immediately terminate any Contract without further obligation if any NJPA employee significantly involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting, or creating the Contract on behalf of NJPA has colluded with any Proposer for personal gain. NJPA may also immediately cancel a Contract if it finds that gratuities, in the form of entertainment, gifts or otherwise, were offered or given by the Vendor or any agent or representative of the Vendor, to any employee of NJPA. Such terminations are effective upon written notice from NJPA or at a later date designated in the notice. Termination of the Contract does not relieve either party of the financial, product, or service obligations incurred before the termination. 8 GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 8. ADVERTISING A CONTRACT RESULTING FROM THIS RFP 8.1 Proposer/Vendor must not advertise or publish information concerning this Contract before the award is announced by NJPA. Once the award is made, a Vendor is expected to advertise the awarded Contract to both current and potential NJPA Members. B. APPLICABLE LAW 8.2 [This section is intentionally blank.] 8.3 NJPA Compliance with Minnesota Procurement Law: NJPA has designed its procurement process to comply with best practices in the State of Minnesota. NJPA’s solicitation methods are also created to comply with many of the various requirements that our Members must satisfy in their own procurement processes. But these requirements may differ considerably and may change from time to time. So each NJPA Member must make its own determination whether NJPA’s solicitation process satisfies the procurement rules in the Member’s jurisdiction. 8.4 Governing law with respect to delivery and acceptance: All applicable portions of the Minnesota Uniform Commercial Code, all other applicable Minnesota laws, and the applicable laws and rules of delivery and inspection of the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) laws will govern NJPA contracts resulting from this solicitation. 8.5 Jurisdiction: Any claims that arise against NJPA pertaining to this RFP, and any resulting contract that develops between NJPA and any other party, must be brought only in courts in Todd County in the State of Minnesota unless otherwise agreed to. 8.5.1 Purchase orders or other agreements created pursuant to a contract resulting from this solicitation must be construed in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of the issuing Member. Any claim arising from such a purchase order or agreement must be filed and venued in a court of competent jurisdiction of the Member unless otherwise agreed to. 8.6 through 8.7 [This section is intentionally blank.] 8.8 Indemnification: Each party is responsible for its own acts and is not responsible for the acts of the other party and the results thereof. NJPA’s liability is governed by the Minnesota Tort Claims Act (Minn. Stat. §3.736) and other applicable law. 8.9 Prevailing wage: The Vendor must comply with applicable prevailing wage legislation in effect in the jurisdiction of the NJPA Member. The Vendor must monitor the prevailing wage rates as established by 28 the appropriate federal governmental entity during the term of this Contract and adjust wage rates accordingly. 8.10 Patent and copyright infringement: The Vendor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless NJPA and NJPA Members against any and all suits, claims, judgments, and costs instituted or recovered against the Vendor, NJPA, or NJPA Members by any person on account of the use or sale of any articles by NJPA or NJPA Members if the Vendor supplied such articles in violation of applicable patent or copyright laws. C. ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT 8.11 No right or interest in this Contract may be assigned or transferred by the Vendor without prior written permission by the NJPA. No delegation of any duty of the Vendor under this Contract may be made without prior written permission of the NJPA. NJPA will notify Members by posting approved assignments on the NJPA website (www.njpacoop.org). 8.12 If the original Vendor sells or transfers all assets or the entire portion of the assets used to perform this Contract, a successor-in-interest must perform all obligations under this Contract. NJPA reserves the right to reject the acquiring entity as a Vendor. A change of name agreement will not change the contractual obligations of the Vendor. D. LIST OF PROPOSERS 8.13 NJPA will not maintain a list of interested proposers, nor will it automatically send RFPs to them. All interested proposers must request the RFP as a result of NJPA’s national solicitation advertisements. Because of the wide scope of the potential Members and qualified national suppliers, NJPA has determined this to be the best method of fairly soliciting proposals. E. CAPTIONS, HEADINGS, AND ILLUSTRATIONS 8.14 The captions, illustrations, headings, and subheadings in this RFP are for convenience and ease of understanding and in no way define or limit the scope or intent of this request. F. DATA PRACTICES 8.15 All materials submitted in response to this RFP become NJPA’s property and become public records (under Minn. Stat. §13.591) after the evaluation process is completed. If the Proposer submits information in response to this RFP that it requests to be classified as nonpublic information (as defined by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. §13.37), the Proposer must meet the following requirements. 8.15.1 The Proposer must make the request within thirty (30) days of the award/nonaward notification, and include the appropriate statutory justification. Pricing, marketing plans, and financial information is generally not redactable. The NJPA Legal Department will review the request to determine whether the information can be withheld or redacted. If NJPA determines that it must disclose the information upon a proper request for such information, NJPA will inform the Proposer of such determination. 8.15.2 The Proposer must defend any action seeking release of the materials that it believes to be nonpublic information, and it must indemnify and hold harmless NJPA, its agents, and employees, from any judgments or damages awarded against NJPA in favor of the party requesting the materials, and any and all costs connected with that defense. This indemnification survives the term of any contract awarded under this RFP. In submitting a response to this RFP, the Proposer agrees that this indemnification survives as long as NJPA possesses the confidential information. 8.16 [This section is intentionally blank.] 29 G. ENTIRE AGREEMENT 8.17 This Contract, as defined herein, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties to this Contract. A Contract resulting from this RFP is formed when the NJPA Board of Directors approves and signs the applicable Contract Award & Acceptance document (Form E). H. FORCE MAJEURE 8.18 Except for payments of sums due, neither party is liable to the other nor deemed in default under this Contract if and to the extent that such party’s performance of this Contract is prevented due to force majeure. The term “force majeure” means an occurrence that is beyond the control of the party affected and occurs without its fault or negligence including, but not limited to, the following: acts of God, acts of the public enemy, war, riots, strikes, mobilization, labor disputes, civil disorders, fire, flood, snow, earthquakes, tornadoes or violent wind, tsunamis, wind shears, squalls, Chinooks, blizzards, hail storms, volcanic eruptions, meteor strikes, famine, sink holes, avalanches, lockouts, injunctions-intervention-acts, terrorist events or failures or refusals to act by government authority and/or other similar occurrences where such party is unable to prevent by exercising reasonable diligence. The force majeure is deemed to commence when the party declaring force majeure notifies the other party of the existence of the force majeure and is deemed to continue as long as the results or effects of the force majeure prevent the party from resuming performance in accordance with a Contract resulting from this RFP. Force majeure does not include late deliveries of products and services caused by congestion at a manufacturer’s plant or elsewhere, an oversold condition of the market, inefficiencies, or other similar occurrences. If either party is delayed at any time by force majeure, then the delayed party must (if possible) notify the other party of such delay within forty-eight (48) hours. 8.19 through 8.20 [These sections are intentionally blank.] K. LICENSES 8.21 The Vendor must maintain a valid status on all required federal, state, and local licenses, bonds, and permits required for the operation of the business that the Vendor conducts with NJPA and NJPA Members. 8.22 All responding Proposers must be licensed (where required) and must have the authority to sell and distribute the offered products and services to NJPA and NJPA Members. Documentation of the required licenses and authorities, if applicable, should be included in the Proposer’s response to this RFP. L. MATERIAL SUPPLIERS AND SUB-CONTRACTORS 8.23 The awarded Vendor must supply the names and addresses of sourcing suppliers and sub-contractors as a part of the purchase order when requested by NJPA or an NJPA Member. M. NON-WAIVER OF RIGHTS 8.24 No failure of either party to exercise any power given to it hereunder, nor a failure to insist upon strict compliance by the other party with its obligations hereunder, nor a custom or practice of the parties at variance with the terms hereof, nor any payment under a Contract resulting from this RFP constitutes a waiver of either party’s right to demand exact compliance with the terms hereof. Failure by NJPA to take action or to assert any right hereunder does not constitute a waiver of such right. N. PROTESTS OF AWARDS MADE 8.25 And protests must be filed with NJPA’s Executive Director and must be resolved in accordance with appropriate Minnesota rules. Protests will only be accepted from Proposers. A protest of an award or 30 nonaward must be filed in writing with NJPA within ten (10) calendar days after the public notice or announcement of the award or nonaward. A protest must include the following items. 8.25.1 The name, address, and telephone number of the protester; 8.25.2 The original signature of the protester or its representative (you must document the authority of the representative); 8.25.3 Identification of the solicitation by RFP number; 8.25.4 Identification of the statute or procedure that is alleged to have been violated; 8.25.5 A precise statement of the relevant facts; 8.25.6 Identification of the issues to be resolved; 8.25.7 The aggrieved party’s argument and supporting documentation; 8.25.8 The aggrieved party’s statement of potential financial damages; and 8.25.9 A protest bond in the name of NJPA and in the amount of 10% of the aggrieved party’s statement of potential financial damages. O. SUSPENSION OR DISBARMENT STATUS 8.26 If within the past five (5) years, any firm, business, person or Proposer responding to an NJPA solicitation has been lawfully terminated, suspended, or precluded from participating in any public procurement activity with a federal, state, or local government or education agency, the Proposer must include a letter with its response setting forth the name and address of the public procurement unit, the effective date of the suspension or debarment, the duration of the suspension or debarment, and the relevant circumstances relating to the suspension or debarment. Any failure to supply such a letter or to disclose pertinent information may result in the termination of a Contract. By signing the proposal affidavit, the Proposer certifies that no current suspension or debarment exists. P. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND IMMIGRATION STATUS CERTIFICATION 8.27 An Affirmative Action Plan, Certificate of Affirmative Action, or other documentation regarding Affirmative Action may be required by NJPA or NJPA Members relating to a transaction from this RFP. Vendors must comply with any such requirements or requests. 8.28 Immigration Status Certification may be required by NJPA or NJPA Members relating to a transaction from this RFP. Vendors must comply with any such requirements or requests. Q. SEVERABILITY 8.29 In the event that any of the terms of a Contract resulting from this RFP are in conflict with any rule, law, or statutory provision, or are otherwise unenforceable under the laws or regulations of any government or subdivision thereof, such terms will be deemed stricken from the Contract, but such invalidity or unenforceability shall not invalidate any of the other terms of an awarded Contract resulting from this RFP. R. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES 8.30 No Contract resulting from this RFP may be considered a contract of employment. The relationship between NJPA and an awarded Vendor is one of independent contractors, each free to exercise judgment and discretion with regard to the conduct of their respective businesses. The parties neither intend the proposed Contract to create, nor is to be construed as creating, a partnership, joint venture, master-servant, 31 principal-agent, or any other, relationship. Except as provided elsewhere in this RFP, neither party may be held liable for acts of omission or commission of the other party and neither party is authorized or has the power to obligate the other party by contract, agreement, warranty, representation, or otherwise in any manner whatsoever except as may be expressly provided herein. 9 FORMS [THE REST OF THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK.] 32 Form A PROPOSER QUESTIONNAIRE- General Business Information (Products, Pricing, Sector Specific, Services, Terms and Warranty are addressed on Form P) Proposer Name: ____________________________Questionnaire completed by: ________________________________ Please identify the person NJPA should correspond with from now through the Award process: Name: _____________________________________ E-Mail address: _______________________________________ Please answer the questions below using the Microsoft Word® version of this document. This allows NJPA evaluators to cut and paste your answers into a separate worksheet. Place your answer directly below each question. NJPA prefers a brief but thorough response to each question. Please do not merely attach additional documents to your response without also providing a substantive response. Do not leave answers blank; mark “NA” if the question does not apply to you (preferably with an explanation). Please create a response that is easy to read and understand. For example, you may consider using a different font and color to distinguish your answer from the questions. Company Information & Financial Strength 1) Provide the full legal name, mailing and email addresses, tax identification number, and telephone number for your business. Provide a brief history of your company, including your company’s core values, business philosophy, and longevity in the CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES industry. 2) Provide a detailed description of the products and services that you are offering in your proposal. 3) What are your company’s expectations in the event of an award? 4) Demonstrate your financial strength and stability with meaningful data. This could include such items as financial statements, SEC filings, credit and bond ratings, letters of credit, and detailed reference letters. 5) Has your business ever petitioned for bankruptcy protection? Please explain in detail. 6) How is your organization best described: is it a manufacturer, a distributor/dealer/reseller, or a service provider? Answer whichever question (either a) or b) just below) best applies to your organization. a) If your company is best described as a distributor/dealer/reseller (or similar entity), please provide your written authorization to act as a distributor/dealer/reseller for the manufacturer of the products proposed in this RFP. If applicable, is your dealer network independent or company owned? b) If your company is best described as a manufacturer or service provider, please describe your relationship with your sales and service force and with your dealer network in delivering the products and services proposed in this RFP. Are these individuals your employees, or the employees of a third party? 7) If applicable, provide a detailed explanation outlining the licenses and certifications that are both required to be held, and actually held, by your organization (including third parties and subcontractors that you use) in pursuit of the business contemplated by this RFP. 8) Provide all “Suspension or Disbarment” information that has applied to your organization during the past ten years. 9) Within this RFP category there may be subcategories of solutions. List subcategory titles that best describe your products and services. Industry Recognition & Marketplace Success 33 10) Describe any relevant industry awards or recognition that your company has received in the past five years. 11) Supply three references/testimonials from your customers who are eligible for NJPA membership. At a minimum, please include the entity’s name, contact person, and phone number. 12) Provide a list of your top five governmental or educational customers (entity name is optional), including entity type, the state the entity is located in, scope of the projects, size of transactions, and dollar volumes from the past three years. 13) Indicate separately what percentages of your sales are to the government and education sectors in the past three years? 14) List any state or cooperative purchasing contracts that you hold. What is the annual sales volume for each of these contracts over the past three years? 15) List any GSA contracts that you hold. What is the annual sales volume for each of these contracts over the past three years? Proposer’s Ability to Sell and Deliver Service Nationwide 16) Describe your company’s capability to meet NJPA Member’s needs across the country. Your response should address at least the following areas. a) Sales force. b) Dealer network or other distribution methods. c) Service force. Please include details, such as the locations of your network of sales and service providers, the number of workers (full- time equivalents) involved in each sector, whether these workers are your direct employers (or employees of a third party), and any overlap between the sales and service functions. 17) Describe in detail the process and procedure of your customer service program, if applicable. Please include your response-time capabilities and commitments, as well as any incentives that help your providers meet your stated service goals or promises. 18) Identify any geographic areas of the United States or NJPA Member sectors (i.e., government, education, not-for-profit) that you will NOT be fully serving through the proposed contract. Please explain. For example, does your company have only a regional presence, or do other cooperative purchasing contracts limit your ability to promote another contract? 19) Define any specific contract requirements or restrictions that would apply to our Members in Hawaii and Alaska and in US Territories. Marketing Plan 20) If you are awarded a contract, how will you train your sales management, dealer network, and direct sales teams (whichever apply) to ensure maximum impact? Please include how you will communicate your NJPA pricing and other contract detail to your sales force nationally. 21) Describe your marketing strategy for promoting this contract opportunity. Please include representative samples of your marketing materials in electronic format. 22) Describe your use of technology and digital data (e.g., social media, metadata usage) to enhance marketing effectiveness. 23) In your view, what is NJPA’s role in promoting contracts arising out of this RFP? How will you integrate an NJPA- awarded contract into your sales process? 34 24) Are your products or services available through an e-procurement ordering process? If so, describe your e-procurement system and how governmental and educational customers have used it. Value–Added Attributes 25) Describe any product, equipment, maintenance, or operator training programs that you offer to NJPA Members. Please include details, such as whether training is standard or optional, who provides training, and any costs that apply. 26) Describe any technological advances that your proposed products or services offer. 27) Describe any “green” initiatives that relate to your company or to your products or services, and include a list of the certifying agency for each. 28) Describe any Women or Minority Business Entity (WMBE) or Small Business Entity (SBE) accreditations that your company or hub partners have obtained. 29) What unique attributes does your company, your products, or your services offer to NJPA Members? What makes your proposed solutions unique in your industry as it applies to NJPA members? 30) Identify your ability and willingness to provide your products and services to NJPA member agencies in Canada. NOTE: Questions regarding Payment Terms, Warranty, Products/Equipment/Services, Pricing and Delivery, and Industry Specific Items are addressed on Form P. Signature: __________________________________________________________ Date: ________________________ 35 Form B PROPOSER INFORMATION Company Name: _________________________________________________________________________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip: ___________________________________________________________________________ Phone: _____________________________________ Fax: ____________________________________ Toll-Free Number: ___________________________ E-mail: __________________________________ Website Address: _______________________________________________________________________________ COMPANY PERSONNEL CONTACTS Authorized signer for your organization Name: _________________________________________________________________________________ Email: _________________________________________________Phone: ___________________________________ The person identified here must have proper signing authority to sign the “Proposer’s Assurance of Compliance” on behalf of the Proposer. Who prepared your RFP response? Name:__________________________________________________Title:______________________________________ Email: _________________________________________________Phone:_____________________________________ Who is your company’s primary contact person for this proposal? Name: _________________________________________Title:______________________________________ Email: _________________________________________Phone:_____________________________________ Other important contact information Name: _________________________________________Title:______________________________________ Email: _________________________________________Phone:_____________________________________ Name: _________________________________________Title:______________________________________ Email: _________________________________________Phone:_____________________________________ 36 Form C EXCEPTIONS TO PROPOSAL, TERMS, CONDITIONS, AND SOLUTIONS REQUEST Company Name: _____________________________________________________________________________ Any exceptions to the terms, conditions, specifications, or proposal forms contained in this RFP must be noted in writing and included with the Proposer’s response. The Proposer acknowledges that the exceptions listed may or may not be accepted by NJPA or included in the final contract. NJPA will make reasonable efforts to accommodate the listed exceptions and may clarify the exceptions in the appropriate section below. Section/page Term, Condition, or Specification Exception NJPA ACCEPTS Proposer’s Signature: ______________________________________________________ Date: ________________ NJPA’s clarification on exceptions listed above: 37 Contract Award RFP #081716 FORM D Formal Offering of Proposal (To be completed only by the Proposer) CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES In compliance with the Request for Proposal (RFP) for CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES, the undersigned warrants that the Proposer has examined this RFP and, being familiar with all of the instructions, terms and conditions, general and technical specifications, sales and service expectations, and any special terms, agrees to furnish the defined products and related services in full compliance with all terms and conditions of this RFP, any applicable amendments of this RFP, and all Proposer’s response documentation. The Proposer further understands that it accepts the full responsibility as the sole source of solutions proposed in this RFP response and that the Proposer accepts responsibility for any subcontractors used to fulfill this proposal. Company Name: _______________________________ Date: ___________________________________________ Company Address: _______________________________________________________________________________ City:_________________________________________ State: ____________ Zip: __________________________ Contact Person: ________________________________ Title: ___________________________________________ Authorized Signature: ____________________________________________________________________________ (Name printed or typed) 38 Form E Contract Acceptance and Award (To be completed only by NJPA) NJPA #081716 ______________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Proposer’s full legal name Your proposal is hereby accepted, and a Contract is awarded. As an awarded Proposer, you are now bound to provide the defined products and services contained in your proposal offering according to all terms, conditions, and pricing set forth in this RFP, any amendments to this RFP, your response, and any exceptions accepted by NJPA. The effective start date of the Contract will be ___________________________, 20________ and continue until- _________________________ (no later than the later of four years from the expiration date of the currently awarded contract or four years from the NJPA Board’s contract award date). This contract may be extended for a fifth year at NJPA’s discretion. National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA) NJPA Authorized signature: ________________________________ _______________________________________ NJPA Executive Director (Name printed or typed) Awarded this _______ day of_________________________, 20___________ NJPA Contract Number #081716 NJPA Authorized signature: ________________________________ ________________________________________ NJPA Board Member (Name printed or typed) Executed this ______ day of __________________________, 20___________ NJPA Contract Number #081716 The Proposer hereby accepts this Contract award, including all accepted exceptions and NJPA clarifications. Vendor Name ____________________________________________ Vendor Authorized signature: _______________________________ __________________________________ (Name printed or typed) Title: _____________________________________________________________ Executed this _____________ day of ___________________, 20___________ NJPA Contract Number #081716 39 Form F PROPOSER ASSURANCE OF COMPLIANCE Proposal Affidavit Signature Page PROPOSER’S AFFIDAVIT The undersigned, authorized representative of the entity submitting the foregoing proposal (the “Proposer”), swears that the following statements are true to the best of his or her knowledge. 1. The Proposer is submitting its proposal under its true and correct name, the Proposer has been properly originated and legally exists in good standing in its state of residence, the Proposer possesses, or will possess before delivering any products and related services, all applicable licenses necessary for such delivery to NJPA members agencies. The undersigned affirms that he or she is authorized to act on behalf of, and to legally bind the Proposer to the terms in this Contract. 2. The Proposer, or any person representing the Proposer, has not directly or indirectly entered into any agreement or arrangement with any other vendor or supplier, any official or employee of NJPA, or any person, firm, or corporation under contract with NJPA, in an effort to influence the pricing, terms, or conditions relating to this RFP in any way that adversely affects the free and open competition for a Contract award under this RFP. 3. The Proposer has examined and understands the terms, conditions, scope, contract opportunity, specifications request, and other documents in this solicitation and affirms that any and all exceptions have been noted in writing and have been included with the Proposer’s RFP response. 4. The Proposer will, if awarded a Contract, provide to NJPA Members the /products and services in accordance with the terms, conditions, and scope of this RFP, with the Proposer-offered specifications, and with the other documents in this solicitation. 5. The Proposer agrees to deliver products and services through valid contracts, purchase orders, or means that are acceptable to NJPA Members. Unless otherwise agreed to, the Proposer must provide only new and first-quality products and related services to NJPA Members under an awarded Contract. 6. The Proposer will comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local laws, regulations, rules, and orders. 7. The Proposer understands that NJPA will reject RFP proposals that are marked “confidential” (or “nonpublic,” etc.), either substantially or in their entirety. Under Minnesota Statute §13.591, Subd. 4, all proposals are considered nonpublic data until the evaluation is complete and a Contract is awarded. At that point, proposals generally become public data. Minnesota Statute §13.37 permits only certain narrowly defined data to be considered a “trade secret,” and thus nonpublic data under Minnesota’s Data Practices Act. 8. The Proposer understands that it is the Proposer’s duty to protect information that it considers nonpublic, and it agrees to defend and indemnify NJPA for reasonable measures that NJPA takes to uphold such a data designation. [The rest of this page has been left intentionally blank. Signature page below] 40 By signing below, Proposer is acknowledging that he or she has read, understands, and agrees to comply with the terms and conditions specified above. Company Name: Address: ____________________________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip: _______________________________________________________________________________ Telephone Number: ______________________________________________________________ E-mail Address:______________________________________________________________________________ Authorized Signature: _________________________________________________________________________ Authorized Name (printed): ______________________________________________________________________ Title: _______________________________________________________________________________________ Date: _______________________________________________________________________________________ Notarized Subscribed and sworn to before me this ______________ day of ___________________, 20______________ Notary Public in and for the County of __________________________________________ State of __________ My commission expires: _______________________________________________________________________ Signature: __________________________________________________________________________________ 41 Form G OVERALL EVALUATION AND CRITERIA For the Proposed Subject CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES Conformance to RFP Terms and Conditions 50 Financial Viability and Marketplace Success 75 Ability to Sell and Deliver Service Nationwide 100 Marketing Plan 50 Value-Added Attributes 75 Warranty 50 Depth and Breadth of Offered Products and Related Services 200 Pricing 400 TOTAL POINTS 1000 Reviewed by: _________________________________________ Its_________________________________ _________________________________________Its_________________________________ 42 Form P PROPOSER QUESTIONNAIRE Payment Terms, Warranty, Products and Services, Pricing and Delivery, and Industry-Specific Questions Proposer Name: _________________________________________________________________________ Questionnaire completed by: ______________________________________________________________ Payment Terms and Financing Options 1) What are your payment terms (e.g., net 10, net 30)? 2) Do you provide leasing or financing options, especially those options that schools and governmental entities may need to use in order to make certain acquisitions? 3) Briefly describe your proposed order process. Please include enough detail to support your ability to report quarterly sales to NJPA. For example, indicate whether your dealer network is included in your response and whether each dealer (or some other entity) will process the NJPA Members’ purchase orders. 4) Do you accept the P-card procurement and payment process? If so, is there any additional cost to NJPA Members for using this process? Warranty 5) Describe in detail your manufacture warranty program, including conditions and requirements to qualify, claims procedure, and overall structure. You may include in your response a copy of your warranties, but at a minimum please also answer the following questions. • Do your warranties cover all products, parts, and labor? • Do your warranties impose usage restrictions or other limitations that adversely affect coverage? • Do your warranties cover the expense of technicians’ travel time and mileage to perform warranty repairs? • Are there any geographic regions of the United States for which you cannot provide a certified technician to perform warranty repairs? How will NJPA Members in these regions be provided service for warranty repair? • Will you cover warranty service for items made by other manufacturers that are part of your proposal, or are these warranties issues typically passed on to the original equipment manufacturer? • What are your proposed exchange and return programs and policies? 6) Describe any service contract options for the items included in your proposal. Pricing, Delivery, Audits, and Administrative Fee 7) Describe your pricing model (e.g., line-item discounts or product-category discounts). Provide detailed pricing data (including standard or list pricing and the NJPA discounted price) on all of the items that you want NJPA to consider as part of your RFP response. Provide a SKU for each item in your proposal. (Keep in mind that reasonable price and product adjustments can be made during the term of an awarded Contract. See the body of the RFP and the Price and Product Change Request Form for more detail.) 43 8) Please quantify the discount range presented in this response. For example, indicate that the pricing in your response represents is a 50% percent discount from the MSRP or your published list. 9) The pricing offered in this proposal is ________a. the same as the Proposer typically offers to an individual municipality, university, or school district. ________b. the same as the Proposer typically offers to GPOs, cooperative procurement organizations, or state purchasing departments. _________c. better than the Proposer typically offers to GPOs, cooperative procurement organizations, or state purchasing departments. ________d. other than what the Proposer typically offers (please describe). 10) Describe any quantity or volume discounts or rebate programs that you offer. 11) Propose a method of facilitating “sourced” products or related services, which may be referred to as “open market” items or “nonstandard options”. For example, you may supply such items “at cost” or “at cost plus a percentage,” or you may supply a quote for each such request. 12) Identify any total cost of acquisition costs that are NOT included in the pricing submitted with your response. This cost includes all additional charges that are not directly identified as freight or shipping charges. For example, list costs for items like installation, set up, mandatory training, or initial inspection. Identify any parties that impose such costs and their relationship to the Proposer. 13) If delivery or shipping is an additional cost to the NJPA Member, describe in detail the complete shipping and delivery program. 14) Specifically describe those shipping and delivery programs for Alaska, Hawaii, Canada, or any offshore delivery. 15) Describe any unique distribution and/or delivery methods or options offered in your proposal. 16) Please specifically describe any self-audit process or program that you plan to employ to verify compliance with your proposed Contract with NJPA. This process includes ensuring that NJPA Members obtain the proper pricing, that the Vendor reports all sales under the Contract each quarter, and that the Vendor remits the proper administrative fee to NJPA. 17) Identify a proposed administrative fee that you will pay to NJPA for facilitating, managing, and promoting the NJPA Contract in the event that you are awarded a Contract. This fee is typically calculated as a percentage of Vendor’s sales under the Contract or as a per-unit fee; it is not a line-item addition to the Member’s cost of goods. (See RFP Section 6.29 and following for details.) Industry-Specific Questions 18) Describe any manufacturing processes or material specification-related attributes that contribute to chassis strength, durability, and reliability, and that differentiate your offering in the marketplace. 19) Describe any manufacturing processes or material specification-related attributes that contribute to cab strength, durability, and driver safety/usability, and that differentiate your offering in the marketplace. 20) Describe any serviceability attributes (such as remote diagnostics) that your proposal contains. Please indicate which of these attributes are considered “industry-expected attributes” and which you believe are “vendor differentiators.” 21) Provide any market data supporting the longevity and reliability of your proposed solutions. 44 22) As a percentage of your total units sold over the past three years, what portion are day cabs? 23) What is your parts order fill rate? 24) What is your US market share? Canadian share (if any)? Signature: ___________________________________________________________Date: _______________________ 45 10 PRE-SUBMISSION CHECKLIST Check when Completed Contents of Your Bid Proposal Hard Copy Required Signed and Dated Electronic Copy Required - CD or Flash Drive Form A: Proposer Questionnaire with all questions answered completely X - signature page only X Form B: Proposer Information X Form C: Exceptions to Proposal, Terms, Conditions, and Solutions Request X X Form D: Formal Offering of Proposal X X Form E. Contract Acceptance and Award X Form F: Proposers Assurance of Compliance X X Form P: Proposer Questionnaire with all questions answered completely X-signature page only X Certificate of Insurance with $1.5 million coverage X X Copy of all RFP Addendums issued by NJPA X X Pricing for all Products/Equipment/Services within the RFP being proposed X Entire Proposal submittal including signed documents and forms.X All forms in the Hard Copy Required Signed and Dated should be inserted in the front of the submitted response, unbound. Package containing your proposal labeled and sealed with the following language: "Competitive Proposal Enclosed, Hold for Public Opening XX-XX-XXXX" Response Package mailed and delivered prior to deadline to: NJPA, 202 12th St NE, Staples, MN 56479 11 NJPA VENDOR PRICE AND PRODUCT CHANGE REQUEST FORM 46 Section 1. Instructions for Vendor (please obtain the latest version of this form from your NJPA Contract Manager or from NJPA’s website). Requests for equipment/products or service changes, additions, or deletions will be allowed at any time throughout the awarded contract term. All requests must be made in written format by completing sections 2, 3, and 4 of the NJPA Vendor Price and Product Change Request Form and must contain the signature of an authorized Vendor employee in section 5. All changes are subject to review and approval by the NJPA Contracts & Compliance Manager, and must be signed if accepted by the NJPA Executive Director. Submit the request by email to your Contract Manager and to PandP@njpacoop.org. NJPA’s must determine whether any request for change is 1) within the scope of the original RFP, and 2) in the best interests of NJPA and NJPA Members. A signed Price and Product Change Form will be returned to the Vendor contact through email. The Vendor must 1) complete this change request form and individually list or attach all items subject to change, 2) provide a sufficiently detailed explanation and documentation for the change, and 3) include a compete restatement of the pricing document in an appropriate format (preferably Excel®). The pricing document must identify all of the products and services being offered and must conform to the following NJPA product and price change naming convention: (Vendor Name) (NJPA Contract #) (effective pricing date); for example, “COMPANY 012411-CPY eff 02-12-2013.” NOTE: New pricing restatement must include all products and services offered, regardless of whether the prices have changed, and must include a new “effective date” on the pricing documents. This requirement reduces confusion by providing a single, current pricing sheet for each vendor and creates a historical record of pricing changes. ADDITIONS. New products and related services may be added to a contract if such additions are within the scope of the RFP. DELETIONS. New products and related services may be deleted from a contract if an item or service is no longer available and so is not relevant to the contract (for example, the item is discontinued or replaced). PRICE CHANGES: Vendors may request price changes in general terms if they justify the change by product category for the change. For example, a Vendor may request a 3% increase in XYZ Product Line because of a 20% increase in petroleum prices. Price decreases: NJPA expects Vendors to propose their best prices from the outset, but expects reasonable price reductions because of technology advancements and marketplace efficiencies. Price increases: Acceptable increase requests typically include increases to Vendor costs, such as raw material or shipping cost increases. The Vendor must include documentation that justifies the price increase, including letters from suppliers announcing price increases. Also include any special price change details, along with both current and proposed pricing. Refer to the RFP for complete pricing details. Section 2. Vendor Name and Type of Change Request CHECK ALL CHANGES THAT APPLY: AWARDED VENDOR NAME: ☐ Adding Equipment/ Products /Services ☐ Deleting/Discontinuing Equipment/Products/Services ☐ Price Increase NJPA CONTRACT NUMBER: ☐ Price Decrease 11 NJPA VENDOR PRICE AND PRODUCT CHANGE REQUEST FORM 47 Section 3. Detailed Explanation of Need for Changes List equipment/products and/or services that are changing, being added, or being deleted from previous contract price list, along with the percentage change for each item or category. (Attach a separate, detailed document if more than 10 items.) Provide a general statement and documentation explaining the reasons for these price and/or equipment/product/service changes. EXAMPLES: 1-All paper equipment/products and services increased 5% in price due to transportation and fuel costs (see attached documentation of raw materials increase). 2-The 6400 series floor polisher is added to the product list as a new model replacing the 5400 series. The 6400 series 3% increase reflects technological improvements made that improve the rate of efficiency and useful life. The 5400 series is now included in the “Hot List” at a 20% discount from previous pricing until remaining inventory is liquidated. If adding equipment/products/services, provide a general statement how these are in the scope. If changing prices and/or adding equipment/products/services, provide a general statement that the pricing or equipment/products/services is consistent with existing NJPA contract pricing. 11 NJPA VENDOR PRICE AND PRODUCT CHANGE REQUEST FORM 48 Section 4. Complete Restatement of Pricing Submitted A COMPLETE restatement of the pricing including all new and existing equipment/products and services is attached and/or has been emailed to the Vendor’s Contract Manager and to PandP@njpacoop.org. ☐ Yes ☐ No Section 5. Signatures __________________________________________________________ ________________________ Vendor Authorized Signature Date ____________________________________________ Print Name and Title of Authorized Signer __________________________________________________________ _________________________ NJPA Executive Director Signature Date 49 Appendix A NJPA The National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of NJPA and its current and potential Member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal governmental, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution. For your reference, the links below include some, but not all, of the entities included in this proposal. http://www.usa.gov/Agencies/Local_Government/Cities.shtml http://nces.ed.gov/globallocator/ https://harvester.census.gov/imls/search/index.asp http://nccsweb.urban.org/PubApps/search.php http://www.usa.gov/Government/Tribal-Sites/index.shtml http://www.usa.gov/Agencies/State-and-Territories.shtml http://www.nreca.coop/about-electric-cooperatives/member-directory/ Oregon Hawaii Washington ADDENDUM ONE (1) To that certain NJPA RFP #081716 Issued by National Joint Powers Alliance® For the procurement of CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES Consider the following to be part of the above-titled RFP: Section 3.17.1.1 has been revised to reflect the proper weight range for Class 6 chassis. The original RFP stated “Class 6 – 19,000 to 26,000 lbs.” 3.17 Additional Scope Definitions: For purposes of the scope of this solicitation: 3.17.1 In addition to CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES, this solicitation should be read to include, but not to be limited to: 3.17.1.1 Chassis and cabs as classified by the following gross vehicle weight ratings (GVWR): Class 6 – 19,501 to 26,000 lbs.; Class 7 – 26,001 to 33,000 lbs.; Class 8 – 33,001+ lbs. Acknowledgment of Addendum One (1) to RFP 081716 emailed on August 2, 2016. COMPANY NAME: _________________________________________________ SIGNATURE: _________________________________________________ DATE: ________________________________ Please include this signed Addendum with your RFP response. ADDENDUM TWO (2) To that certain NJPA RFP #081716 Issued by National Joint Powers Alliance® For the procurement of CLASS 6, 7, AND 8 CHASSIS WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORIES, AND SERVICES Consider the following to be part of the above -titled RFP: The RFP submission deadline (and other deadlines) has been extended until August 31, 2016. RFP Timeline June 22, 2016 RFP published in the: print/online version of USA Today, print/online version of the Salt Lake News within the State of Utah, print/online version of the Daily Journal of Commerce within the State of Oregon (note: OR entities this pertains to: http://www.njpacoop.org/oregon-advertising), print/online version of The State within the State of South Carolina, the NJPA website, MERX, Noticetobidders.com, PublicPurchase.com, Biddingo, and Onvia. July 27, 20156 Pre -Proposal Conference (the webcast/conference call. The 10:00 a.m. Central Time connection information will be sent to all inquirers two business days before the conference). August 24, 2016 Deadline for RFP questions. August 31, 2016 Deadline for Submission of Proposals. Late responses will be 4:30 p.m. Central Time returned unopened. September 1, 2016 Opening of Proposals. 8:00 a.m. Central Time Acknowledgment of Addendum Two (2) to RFP 081716 e mailed on August 9, 2016. COMPANY NAME: _________________________________________________ SIGNATURE: _________________________________________________ DATE: ________________________________ Please include this signed Addendum with your RFP response. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00579 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-J REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:GREGORY A. BARFIELD, Director Department of Transportation BY:BRIAN BARR, Assistant Director Department of Transportation DUANE MYERS, Fleet Manager Department of Transportation, Municipal Fleet Division CLIFF TRAUGH, Senior Management Analyst Department of Transportation, Municipal Fleet Division SUBJECT Approve the award of a cooperative purchase agreement to Quinn Company of Fresno, California, for the purchase of one Caterpillar 914M wheel loader in the amount of $146,610 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the award of a cooperative purchase agreement to Quinn Company of Fresno,California,for the purchase of one Caterpillar 914M wheel loader in the amount of $146,610. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Department of Public Utilities,Solid Waste Management Division wishes to purchase one Caterpillar 914M wheel loader as a replacement for the Operation Clean Up team.The new unit will be used as the primary means of removing material placed curbside by homeowners during the annual Operation Clean Up program.The wheel loader will be purchased through a competitively solicited cooperative procurement process administered by Sourcewell,formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA). BACKGROUND The Department of Public Utilities,Solid Waste Management Division is responsible for sanitation programs such as Operation Clean Up and litter control for over 111,000 residential customers. City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00579 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-J programs such as Operation Clean Up and litter control for over 111,000 residential customers. Fifteen drivers service a 112-square-mile area recycling discarded lumber,appliances,and various other large objects that would otherwise end up in a landfill.The Solid Waste Management Division annually removes over 29,150 tons of refuse city-wide through these programs. The Caterpillar 914M is used to pick up and load debris,into waiting refuse trucks during the Operation Clean Up process.These loaders are outfitted with a hydraulically controlled claw capable of opening eight feet wide and picking up a cubic yard of material in one cycle.The loaders are rubber wheeled and can be driven to and from the job site at 24 mph.This practice eliminates the need for a truck and trailer transport,which saves time and money.The speed of the equipment combined with its loading capacity,allows three crews to cover all of Operation Clean Up for the city in a ten-month period.In the remaining two months of the year,the loaders are deployed to assist in leaf removal for the Streets Maintenance Division.The Operation Clean Up team has utilized this type of equipment for more than 20 years and has found the 914M to be reliable. The new Caterpillar 914M wheel loader will be built to a specification similar to existing units,updated with the latest technology to increase fuel efficiency,and continue to meet the Tier 4 final emissions standard.The wheel loader will feature a newly developed hydraulic system that allows full operation at a lower RPM, increasing fuel efficiency across all aspects of operation. The wheel loader equipment class is on a ten-year or 5,000-hour replacement schedule,which has been established by the Fleet Management Division as the optimum replacement point.Currently, one unit has been identified for replacement as it is over this target in both age and hours. The purchase price for the unit is $146,610.This price includes the Sourcewell,cooperative purchasing discount applied to City purchases,as well as sales tax at 7.975 percent.The Purchasing Division has approved this contract and recommends Council to approve.The City Attorney has reviewed and approved to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Section 15378, the award of this contract does not qualify as a project as defined by CEQA. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented;the City is purchasing the Caterpillar 914M wheel loader through a cooperative purchase agreement. FISCAL IMPACT No general funds will be used to purchase this item.The funding to cover the purchase cost of the Caterpillar 914M wheel loader has been included in the FY2020 adopted budget under the operations of the Solid Waste Management Division.The source of funding for this project is the Solid Waste Operating Fund, generated primarily by the collection of customer user fees. Attachments: Acceptance and Award City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00579 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-J CAT Contract Combined Ads Comment and Review Evaluation RFP City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ ÛPending biddingo ApprovalBid Notice OnlyType 1Publish /Verify Contents}}}Solicitation Setting Solicitation Details Advertisement ¿Invite Bidders No Evaluate Response online No Internal Approval No Mandatory InformationSolicitation Type RFP Solicitation Number 032119Solicitation Name Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments, and SuppliesProcurement Type Goods Country & Province/StateCanada / Ontario Published By SourcewellAccept Questions Not Applicable Basic SettingsSolicitation Type Open to all suppliers Estimated Contract AmountPublish Date & Time 01/31/2019 Closing Date & Time 03/21/2019 16:30:00 CT !Home(/dashboard)∠List of Bidding (/bidding/list)∠Solicitation DetailsPage 1 of 3Biddingo - Leading e-procurement portal for public and private sector bids1/31/2019https://r2cow.biddingo.com/bidding/423633 ¿Basic SettingsPublish Option Value Range for this SolicitationNot ApplicableSelected CategoriesAutomotive/ IndustrialHeavy Equipment/ VehiclesDump trucks, bull-dozers, cranes, asphalt rollers, etc. tractors Office trailers, skid loader, earthmovers, heavy duty vehicles, excavators, caterpillar, graders, trains etc.Solicitation OverviewHeavy Construction Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments, and Supplies032119Closing Date: 03/21/2019 04:30:00 PM CTDetail: Sourcewell, formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of Sourcewell and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #032119 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning January 31, 2019. Details may be obtained by letter of request to James Voelker, Sourcewell, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479, or by e-mail at RFP@sourcewell-mn.gov. Proposals will be received until March 21, 2019 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened March 22, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time.!Home(/dashboard)∠List of Bidding (/bidding/list)∠Solicitation DetailsPage 2 of 3Biddingo - Leading e-procurement portal for public and private sector bids1/31/2019https://r2cow.biddingo.com/bidding/423633 © Copyright 2019 R2CoW. All Rights Reserved. Powered by (http://www.biddingo.com/)[ SUPPORT (Download Training Manuals) ](/contactUs)¿!Home(/dashboard)∠List of Bidding (/bidding/list)∠Solicitation DetailsPage 3 of 3Biddingo - Leading e-procurement portal for public and private sector bids1/31/2019https://r2cow.biddingo.com/bidding/423633 Notice Basic Information Details Dates Contact Information Bid Submission Process Estimated Contract Value (CAD)$999,999,999.00 (Not shown to suppliers) Reference Number 0000142211 Issuing Organization Sourcewell Owner Organization Solicitation Type RFP - Request for Proposal (Formal) Solicitation Number 032119 Title Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments, and Supplies Source ID PP.CO.USA.868485.C88455 Location All of Canada, All of Canada Purchase Type Term: 2019/05/01 01:00:00 AM EDT - 2023/04/30 01:00:00 AM EDT Description Sourcewell, formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of Sourcewell and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #032119 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning January 31, 2019. Proposals will be received until March 21, 2019 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened March 22, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. Publication 2019/01/31 10:35:40 AM EST Question Acceptance Deadline 2019/03/14 05:30:00 PM EDT Questions are submitted online No Bid Intent Not Available Closing Date 2019/03/21 05:30:00 PM EDT Procurement Department 218-894-1930 rfp@sourcewell-mn.gov Bid Submission Type Electronic Bid Submission Pricing Lump sum Pricing Lump sum Bid Documents List Item Name Description Mandatory Bid Documents Documents defining the proposal No 032119 - Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Acces... 2019/01/31 10:35:59 AM EST Page 1 of 4 Documents Documents Document Size Uploaded Date Language How to obtain RFP documents [pdf]89 Kb 2019/01/31 10:34:16 AM EST English 032119 - Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Acces... 2019/01/31 10:35:59 AM EST Page 2 of 4 Categories Selected Categories MERX Category (1) G Goods Goods G18 Industrial Equipment Industrial Equipment UNSPSC (6) 22000000 Building and Construction Machinery and Accessories 22100000 Heavy construction machinery and equipment 22101500 Earth moving machinery 22101600 Paving equipment 22101700 Heavy equipment components 22101800 Aerial lifts 22101900 Building construction machinery and accessories 22102000 Building demolition machinery and equipment 032119 - Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Acces... 2019/01/31 10:35:59 AM EST Page 3 of 4 Document Request List Document Request List Organization Name Main Contact Download Date City Province/State No document has been requested yet. 032119 - Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Acces... 2019/01/31 10:35:59 AM EST Page 4 of 4 1 Carol Jackson From:Carol Jackson Sent:Thursday, January 31, 2019 8:23 AM To:'twatson@onvia.com' Subject:RFP for Advertisement (Heavy Construction) Hello, Please advertise in any free editions you have. Sourcewell, formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of Sourcewell and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K‐12 education, not‐for‐profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #032119 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning January 31, 2019. Details may be obtained by letter of request to James Voelker, Sourcewell, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479, or by e‐mail at RFP@sourcewell‐ mn.gov. Proposals will be received until March 21, 2019 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened March 22, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. Thank you, Carol Jackson | Procurement Analyst III Office: 218‐894‐5481 Website: www.sourcewell‐mn.gov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n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`` ` i &NQJSF4UBUF%FWFMPQNFOUIUUQXXXFTEOZHPW RI Order Confirmation Customer Fax Customer Customer Address Payor Customer Customer Account Customer Phone Payor Account Ordered By Customer EMail Special Pricing PO Number Tear Sheets Invoice Text Proofs Affidavits Net Amount Blind Box Tax Amount Promo Type Package Buy Total Amount Materials Payment Method Payment Amount Amount Due Payor Address Payor Phone SOURCEWELL SOURCEWELL Carol Jackson 327043 327043 Carol Jackson PO BOX 219 STAPLES MN 56479 USA PO BOX 219 STAPLES MN 56479 USA carol.jackson@sourcewell-mn.gov 0 0 1 RFP- Heavy Construction Equipment $231.77 $0.00 $231.77 Check $0.00 Sales Rep jjeffries@charlotteobserver Order Taker ksams@charlotteobserver.com 0004062615 Ad Order Number Order Source 218-894-1930 218-894-1930 $231.77 _FRM_OrderConfirmation.rptPage 1 of 21/28/2019 1:29:40PM Ad Attributes Ad Released Pick UpExternal Ad Number Ad Number Ad Type Production Method Production Notes 0004062615-01 COL-Legal-Liner AdBooker No 0003984234 Ad Order Information Ad Size Color 1 X 41 li 0301 - Legals & Public Notices 0300 - Legals ClassifiedCOL- The State 01/31/2019 Run Dates Schedule CostPlacementProduct PositionRun Schedule Invoice Text Times Run 1 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Sourcewell, forme $216.77 0301 - Legals & Public Notices 0300 - Legals ClassifiedCOL-upsell.ST.com 01/31/2019, 02/01/2019, 02/02/2019, 02/03/2019, 02/04/2019, 02/05/2019, 02/06/2019 Run Dates Schedule CostPlacementProduct PositionRun Schedule Invoice Text Times Run 7 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Sourcewell, forme $15.00 _FRM_OrderConfirmation.rptPage 2 of 21/28/2019 1:29:40PM Chat Help Logout[Switch to Vendor View]HomeNew BidClosed BidsMy StuffToolsBid RFP #032119 - Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments, and Supplies Bid TypeRFPBid Number032119TitleHeavy Construction Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments, and SuppliesStart DateJan 31, 2019 9:46:00 AM CSTEnd DateMar 21, 2019 4:30:00 PM CDTAgencySourcewellBid ContactCarol Jackson(218) 894-5481carol.jackson@sourcwell-mn.govPO Box 219Staples, MN 56479 Access ReportsView reports on who has been notified of the bid or accessed it.[Notification report] [Access report]Questions0 Questions0 Unanswered[View/Ask Questions]Edit Bid[Create Addendum]DescriptionSourcewell, formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of Sourcewell and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #032119 HEAVY CONSTRUCTIONEQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning January 31, 2019. Details may be obtained by letter of request to James Voelker, Sourcewell, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479, or by e-mail at RFP@sourcewell-mn.gov. Proposals will be received until March 21, 2019 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened March 22, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. Page 1 of 2Public Purchase: Bid RFP #032119 -Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments, and Supplies1/31/2019https://www.publicpurchase.com/gems/bid/bidView?bidId=107646 Delivery InformationJames Voelker, Sourcewell202 12th Street NEP.O. Box 219Staples, MN 56479Pre-Bid ConferenceDate Mar 5, 2019 10:00:00 AM CSTLocation Web ConferenceNotesPre-Proposal login information will be emailed two days prior.DocumentsNo Documents for this bidCustomer Support: agencysupport@publicpurchase.com | Copyright 1999-2019 © | The Public Group, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 2 of 2Public Purchase: Bid RFP #032119 -Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments, and Supplies1/31/2019https://www.publicpurchase.com/gems/bid/bidView?bidId=107646 Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments, ... http://njpa.prod.acquia-sites.com/node/668366 1 of 3 2/5/2019 9:01 AM Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments, ... http://njpa.prod.acquia-sites.com/node/668366 2 of 3 2/5/2019 9:01 AM Heavy Construction Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments, ... http://njpa.prod.acquia-sites.com/node/668366 3 of 3 2/5/2019 9:01 AM Sourcewell, formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of Sourcewell and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #032119 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning January 31, 2019. Details may be obtained by letter of request to James Voelker, Sourcewell, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479, or by e-mail at RFP@sourcewell-mn.gov. Proposals will be received until March 21, 2019 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened March 22, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. usat-usatnonbus-100074451-display-public-notices-14257.indd 1 1/28/19 11:20 AM COMMENT AND REVIEW to the REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) #032119 Entitled HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES The following advertisement was placed in Oregon’s Daily Journal of Commerce on February 1, 2019 and January 31, 2019 in Utah’s The Salt Lake Tribune, in USA Today, in South Carolina’s The State, and on the Sourcewell website www.sourcewell-mn.gov, Biddingo, Merx, The New York State Contract Reporter website www.nyscr.ny.gov, Onvia website www.onvia.com, and PublicPurchase.com: Sourcewell, formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of Sourcewell and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not- for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #032119 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning January 31, 2019. Details may be obtained by letter of request to James Voelker, Sourcewell, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479, or by e-mail at RFP@sourcewell-mn.gov. Proposals will be received until March 21, 2019 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened March 22, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. RFPs were requested by and distributed to: Able Equipment Rental Komatsu America Corp. AGS Safety and Supply Langefels Equipment Co. LLC Ahern Rentals Leschak Kitchens Mob, LLC Alden Equipment, Inc. Liddell Industries, Inc. All American Poly Corp. Link Belt Cranes All Around Access LLC Manitex Anderson Equipment Co. Manitou ASV Holdings, Inc. Manitowoc Bear Cat Mfg. Mazergroup Ben Berg Farm & Industrial equipment Ltd. M-B Companies Bid Ocean, Inc. McCloskey International Ltd. Black River Contracting Midwest Equipment Auctions Bobcat of Helena MTZ Equipment Bobcat/Doosan/Clark Equip. NorMont Equipment Company BOMAG Nortrax Canada Inc. C&B Billings Odyne Systems CASE Construction Office Tree Products Cashman Equipment Co Paladin Attachments Caterpillar, Inc. Pape Machinery, Inc. DocuSign Envelope ID: 394C5521-059D-4959-8F0F-E01292398521 Central Maine Equipment Company Prime Vendor Inc. Central Power Systems and Services Princeton Planning & Project Management, PLLC ConstructConnect Prinoth Ltd Construction Industry Center RDO Equipment CSS, Inc. Reclaim Asphalt Cutting Edge Excavation Road Widener LLC Deltek Roadtec Inc Diesel Machinery Inc Royal Truck & Equipment Doggett Machinery RSC Bio Solutions Doosan Portable Power SmartProcure Dynapac North America Stan Houston Equipment Earthworks equipment Corporation State of Oregon EKA Suffolk County Brake Service Inc. Evergreen Specialty Services Sunbelt Rentals Canada Federal Contracts Corporation Technology International, Inc Franssen Motors Dubai Jet City Equipment Terex/Genie FST Canada Inc. o/a Joe Johnson Equipment Terramac LLC Government Solutions Team, LLC Thompson Pump Green Climber NA Titan Machinery H.O. Penn Machinery Company Toromont Cat Hartford Truck Equipment Inc Tracey Road Equipment Inc HilBilt Sales Tri-State Truck & Equipment Hi-Line Rental, LLC United Rentals Holt Co Volvo Hyundai Construction Equipment Americas Wacker Neuson Corporation J.Gross Equipment Washington State Department of Enterprise Services JCB Western Material Handling John Deere Wirtgen Kleis Equipment XCMG North America Corp. Kobelco Construction Machinery, U.S.A. Yeager Enterprises LLC Proposals were opened on March 22, 2019, at Sourcewell, formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA) offices located at 202 12th Street Northeast in Staples, Minnesota 56479, from the following: BOMAG Americas, Inc. Caterpillar Inc. CNH Industrial America LLC Doggett Heavy Machinery Doosan Infracore North America, LLC Dynapac North America LLC Grove U.S. L.L.C. (dba Manitowac) Hyundai Construction Equipment Americas, Inc. John Deere Construction Retail Sales DocuSign Envelope ID: 394C5521-059D-4959-8F0F-E01292398521 Kobelco Construction Machinery USA, Inc. Komatsu America Corp. Link Belt Cranes Roadtec, Inc Volvo Construction Equipment North America, LLC Wirtgen America, Inc. Proposals were reviewed by the Proposal Evaluation Committee: James Voelker, CPCM, CFCM, Procurement Lead Analyst Greg Grunig, Sourcewell Procurement Lead Analyst Carol Jackson, Sourcewell Procurement Analyst III Michael Munoz, Sourcewell Procurement Analyst III Craig West, Sourcewell Procurement Analyst II The findings of the Proposal Evaluation Committee are summarized as follows: The Proposal Evaluation Committee used the Sourcewell RFP evaluation criteria and determined that all proposal responses met Level-One responsiveness except for the response received from Doggett Heavy Machinery. The response of Doggett Heavy Machinery was determined to be Level-One non-responsive because the questions on Forms A and P were not answered. All other proposals were found to be responsive and were evaluated. BOMAG Americas, Inc. is a manufacturer that specializes in roadway construction equipment. BOMAG Americas offers asphalt pavers, screeds, milling machines, rollers and more. The ECO package available on most of their compaction equipment allows for up to a 20 percent reduction in fuel consumption. BOMAG Americas has a strong sales and distribution network throughout the United States and Canada to meet Member needs. BOMAG Americas offers a significant discount for Sourcewell Members. Caterpillar, Inc provides an extensive line of construction equipment that includes multiple varieties of wheel and track loaders, excavators, skid steers, motor graders, rollers and pavers just to name a few. Remote monitoring and telematics are available on every machine allowing Members to monitor machine health and operation. Caterpillar has an extensive network of approximately 600 authorized dealer locations and 167 rental stores in the United States and Canada that will serve Sourcewell Members. They offer Members a competitive discount on pricing. CNH Industrial America LLC’s construction equipment catalog offers a full complement of backhoes, dozers, motor graders, compaction equipment, rough terrain forklifts, wheel loaders and excavators of different sizes and designs. Case’s Heavy Equipment line receive Case ProCare which includes a factory warranty and planned maintenance for the first 3 years/3000 hours and a 3-year advanced telematics subscription. CNH boasts a dedicated dealer network of over 1100 locations across North America. CNH provides Members a solid discount from MSRP. DocuSign Envelope ID: 394C5521-059D-4959-8F0F-E01292398521 Grove U.S. LLC dba Manitowoc’s product offering includes industrial, rough terrain, all-terrain, lattice and hydraulic crawler, truck mounted and boom truck cranes. Manitowoc includes an initial operation and maintenance training package as part of delivery with every purchase at no additional charge. Manitowoc’s robust dealer network is located throughout the United States and Canada. They are offering Members a strong discount from published list prices. Hyundai Construction Equipment Americas, Inc. provides multiple models of construction equipment including excavators in a range of sizes, wheel loaders, compaction rollers and hydraulic breakers. Hyundai’s excavators and wheel loaders have the All Around View Monitoring (AAVM) camera system that provides a 360 degree field of view to the operator available as an enhanced safety feature. Hyundai is prepared to serve Members through a distribution network covering the United States and Canada. Hyundai also offers a competitive discount from catalog prices. John Deere Construction Retail Sales catalog offers a comprehensive solution of construction equipment including, but not limited to backhoes, crawler, tractor and wheel loaders, dozers, excavators, motor graders and skid steers. John Deere’s WorkSight suite of technologies provides features including JDLink Telematics, machine health prognostics, remote diagnostics and programming, payload weighing and grade control. John Deere’s extensive dealer network of nearly 1,500 locations in the United States and Canada stands ready to support Members. John Deere offers Sourcewell Members a significant discount from list prices. Komatsu America Corp. is providing Sourcewell Members a deep selection of construction equipment including excavators, crawler dozers, motor graders, excavators and wheel loaders. Komatsu also offers two models of hybrid excavators which decrease fuel consumption by up to 20 percent, reduce carbon dioxide emissions and provide a quieter operating environment. Their large dealer network and ten regional parts depots are located across North America to serve Members. Komatsu provides a strong discount from list prices. Link Belt Cranes offers a wide selection cranes including lattice crawler, telescopic crawler, telescopic rough terrain, telescopic truck and all-terrain models. Link Belt provides a free 24-month subscription to their iCraneTrax Lite telematics network. Their distribution sales team and technicians are located across North America to provide sales and service support. Link Belt offers Members a competitive discount from list prices. Volvo Construction Equipment North America, LLC catalog includes an extensive array of construction equipment including wheel loaders, excavators, haulers, compactors, pavers, skid steers and compact track loaders. Volvo Co-Pilot offers a fully integrated and supported touch screen machine indication system to machine and operator performance. Volvo’s large dealer network is ready to serve Sourcewell Members throughout the United States and Canada. Their pricing proposal offers Members a solid discount from MSRP. For these reasons, the Sourcewell Proposal Review Committee recommends award of Sourcewell Contract #032119 to: BOMAG Americas, Inc. #032119-BAI Caterpillar, Inc. #032119-CAT CNH Industrial America LLC #032119-CNH Grove U.S. LLC dba Manitowoc #032119-GUS DocuSign Envelope ID: 394C5521-059D-4959-8F0F-E01292398521 Hyundai Construction Equipment Americas, Inc. #032119-HCE John Deere Construction Retail Sales #032119-JDC Komatsu America Corp. #032119-KOM Link Belt Cranes #032119-LIN Volvo Construction Equipment North America, LLC #032119-VCE The preceding recommendations were approved on May 9, 2019. _______________________________________________________ James Voelker, CPCM, CFCM, Sourcewell Procurement Lead Analyst __________________________________________ Greg Grunig, Sourcewell Procurement Lead Analyst _________________________________________ Carol Jackson, Sourcewell Procurement Analyst III ___________________________________________ Michael Munoz, Sourcewell Procurement Analyst III ______________________________________ Craig West, Sourcewell Procurement Analyst II DocuSign Envelope ID: 394C5521-059D-4959-8F0F-E01292398521 RFP # 032119BOMAG Americas, Inc. Caterpillar Inc. CNH Industrial America LLCDoosan Infracore North America, LLC Dynapac North America LLCGrove U.S. L.L.C. (dba Manitowoc)Hyundai Construction Equipment Americas, Inc.Possible PointsConformance to Terms/ Conditions to Include Documentation 5040 46 44 37 34 41 40Pricing 400352 359 321 313 346 347 353Financial, Industry and Marketplace Successes 7564 70 68 61 60 66 59Bidder's Ability to Sell/ Service Contract Nationally 10082 92 89 78 83 84 79Bidder's Marketing Plan 5037 44 44 38 39 42 39Value Added Attributes 7556 70 66 56 62 60 65Warranty Coverages and Information 5042 45 44 39 39 41 46Selection and Variety of Products and Services Offered 200159 186 176 156 154 159 168Total Points 1000832 912 852 778 817 840 849Rank Order815121076John Deere Construction Retail SalesKobelco Construction Machinery USA, Inc. Komatsu America Corp. Link Belt Cranes Roadtec, IncVolvo Construction Equipment North America, LLC Wirtgen America, Inc.Possible PointsConformance to Terms/ Conditions to Include Documentation 5042 37 43 34 41 43 41Pricing 400344 264 345 342 313 337 320Financial, Industry and Marketplace Successes 7566 52 63 66 60 68 64Bidder's Ability to Sell/ Service Contract Nationally 10091 74 90 82 72 91 84Bidder's Marketing Plan 5041 46 44 40 36 45 38Value Added Attributes 7567 62 67 65 59 70 63Warranty Coverages and Information 5043 42 44 42 36 44 40Selection and Variety of Products and Services Offered 200181 151 177 160 156 180 157Total Points 1000875 728 873 831 773 878 807Rank Order314 4 913 211________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________James Voelker, CPCM, CFCM, Sourcewell Greg Grunig, Sourcewell Carol Jackson, Sourcewell______________________________________ ________________________Michael Munoz, Sourcewell Craig West, SourcewellForm GHEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIESDocuSign Envelope ID: BF761C4D-7D5B-4B3C-947E-209599537EE6 1 Sourcewell℠ Formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA) REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL for the procurement of HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES RFP Opening March 22, 2019 8:30 a.m. Central Time At the offices of Sourcewell 202 12th Street Northeast, Staples, MN 56479 RFP #032119 Sourcewell, formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA), on behalf of Sourcewell and its current and potential member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal government, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution for the procurement of #032119 HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. Details of this RFP are available beginning January 31, 2019. Details may be obtained by letter of request to James Voelker, Sourcewell, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479, or by e-mail at RFP@sourcewell-mn.gov. Proposals will be received until March 21, 2019 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened March 22, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. Central Time. RFP Timeline January 31, 2019 Publication of RFP in the print and online version of USA Today, in the print and online version of the Salt Lake News within the State of Utah, in the print and online version of the Daily Journal of Commerce within the State of Oregon (note: OR entities this pertains to: www.sourcewell- mn.gov/compliance-legal/oregon-advertising and also RFP Appendix B), in the print and online version of The State within the State of South Carolina, the Sourcewell website, MERX, PublicPurchase.com, Biddingo, and Onvia. March 5, 2019 10:00 a.m. CT Pre-Proposal Conference (the webcast/conference call). The connection information will be sent to all inquirers two business days before the conference. March 14, 2019 Deadline for RFP questions. March 21, 2019 4:30 p.m. CT Deadline for Submission of Proposals. Late responses will be returned unopened. March 22, 2019 8:30 a.m. CT Public Opening of Proposals. Direct questions regarding this RFP to: James Voelker at james.voelker@sourcewell-mn.gov or 218-895-4191. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. DEFINITIONS A. Contract B. Proposer C. Sourced Good of Open Market Item D. Vendor 2. ADVERTISEMENT OF RFP 3. INTRODUCTION A. About Sourcewell B. Joint Exercise of Powers Laws C. Why Respond to a National Cooperative Procurement Contract D. The Intent of This RFP E. Scope of This RFP F. Expectations for Equipment/Products and Services Being Proposed G. Solutions Based Solicitation 4. INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING YOUR PROPOSAL A. Inquiry Period B. Pre-Proposal Conference C. Identification of Key Personnel D. Proposer’s Exceptions to Terms and Conditions E. Proposal Format F. Questions & Answers About This RFP G. Modification or Withdrawal of a Submitted Proposal H. Proposal Opening Procedure I. Sourcewell’s Rights Reserved 5. PRICING A. Line-Item Pricing B. Percentage Discount From Catalog or Category C. Cost Plus a Percentage of Cost D. Hot List Pricing E. Ceiling Price F. Volume Price Discounts/ Additional Quantities G. Total Cost of Acquisition H. Sourced Equipment/Products/ Open Market Items I. Price and Product Changes J. Payment Terms K. Sales Tax L. Shipping 6. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS A. Proposal Evaluation Process B. Proposer Responsiveness C. Proposal Evaluation Criteria D. Other Consideration E. Cost Comparison F. Marketing Plan G. Certificate Of Insurance H. Order Process and/or Funds Flow I. Administrative Fees J. Value Added K. Waiver of Formalities 7. POST AWARD OPERATING ISSUES A. Subsequent Agreements B. Sourcewell Member Sign-up Procedure C. Reporting of Sales Activity D. Audits E. Hub Partner F. Trade-Ins G. Out of Stock Notification H. Termination of a Contract resulting from this RFP 8. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDIITONS A. Advertising a Contract Resulting From This RFP B. Applicable Law C. Assignment of Contract D. List of Proposers E. Captions, Headings, and Illustrations F. Data Practices G. Entire Agreement H. Force Majeure I. Licenses J. Material Suppliers and Sub-Contractors K. Non-Wavier of Rights L. Protests of Awards Made M. Suspension or Disbarment Status N. Affirmative Action and Immigration Status Certification O. Severability P. Relationship of Parties Q. Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Procurements under Federal Awards or Other Awards 9. FORMS 10. PRE-SUBMISSION CHECKLIST 11. PRICE & PRODUCT CHANGE REQUEST FORM 12. APPENDIX A 13. APPENDIX B – HI, ID, OR, SC, UT, WA Political Subdivisions (SEPARATE ATTACHMENT) 14. APPENDIX C – VA Political Subdivisions (SEPARATE ATTACHMENT) 15. APPENDIX D – FEMA Terms & Conditions (SEPARATE ATTACHMENT) 3 1 DEFINITIONS A. CONTRACT Contract means this RFP, current pricing information, fully executed Forms C, D, F, & P from the Proposer’s response pursuant to this RFP, and a fully executed Form E (“Acceptance and Award”) with final terms and conditions. Form E will be executed after a formal award and will provide final clarification of terms and conditions of the award. B. PROPOSER A Proposer is a company, person, or entity delivering a timely response to this RFP. This RFP may also use the terms “respondent” or “proposed Vendor,” which is interchangeable with Proposer as the context allows. C. SOURCED GOOD or OPEN MARKET ITEM A Sourced Good or Open Market Item is a product within the RFP’s scope 1) that is not currently available under the Vendor’s Sourcewell contract, 2) that a member wants to buy under contract from an awarded Vendor, and 3) that is generally deemed incidental to the total transaction or purchase of contract items. D. VENDOR A Proposer whose response has been awarded a contract pursuant to this RFP. 4 2 ADVERTISEMENT OF RFP 2.1 Sourcewell advertises this solicitation: 1) in the hard copy print and online editions of the USA Today; 2) once each in Oregon’s Daily Journal of Commerce, South Carolina’s The State and Utah’s Salt Lake Tribune; 3) on Sourcewell’s website; and 4) on other third-party websites deemed appropriate by Sourcewell. Other third-party advertisers may include Onvia, PublicPurchase.com, MERX, and Biddingo. 2.2 Sourcewell also notifies and provides solicitation documentation to each state-level procurement departments for possible re-posting of the solicitation within their systems and at their option for future use and to meet specific state requirements. 3 INTRODUCTION A. ABOUT SOURCEWELL 3.1 Sourcewell, formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA) is a public agency serving as a national municipal contracting agency established under the Service Cooperative statute by Minnesota Legislative Statute §123A.21 with the authority to develop and offer, among other services, cooperative procurement services to its membership. Eligible membership and participation includes states, cities, counties, all government agencies, both public and non-public educational agencies, colleges, universities and non-profit organizations. 3.2 Under the authority of Minnesota state laws and enabling legislation, Sourcewell facilitates a competitive solicitation and contracting process on behalf of the needs of itself and the needs of current and potential member agencies nationally. This process results in national procurement contracts with various Vendors of products/equipment and services which Sourcewell Member agencies desire to procure. These procurement contracts are created in compliance with applicable Minnesota Municipal Contracting Laws. A complete listing of Sourcewell cooperative procurement contracts can be found at www.sourcewell- mn.gov. 3.3 Sourcewell is a public agency governed by publicly elected officials that serve as the Sourcewell Board of Directors. Sourcewell’s Board of Directors oversees and authorizes the calls for all new proposals and holds those resulting Contracts for the benefit of its own and its Members use. 3.4 Sourcewell currently serves over 50,000 member agencies nationally. Both membership and utilization of Sourcewell contracts continue to expand, due in part to the increasing acceptance of Cooperative Purchasing throughout the government and education communities nationally. B. JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS LAWS 3.5 Sourcewell cooperatively shares those contracts with its Members nationwide through various Joint Exercise of Powers Laws or Cooperative Purchasing Statutes established in Minnesota, other states and Canadian provinces. The Minnesota Joint Exercise of Powers Law is Minnesota Statute §471.59 which states “Two or more governmental units…may jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common to the contracting parties…” This Minnesota Statute allows Sourcewell to serve Member agencies located in all other states. Municipal agencies nationally can participate in cooperative purchasing activities under their own state law. These laws can be found on our website at www.sourcewell-mn.gov/compliance-legal. 3.5.1 For Members within the Commonwealth of Virginia, this RFP is intended to be a “joint procurement agreement” as described in Vir. Code § 2.2-4304(A), and those Virginia Members identified in Appendix C may agree to be a Joint Purchaser under this RFP. 3.5.2 For Members within Canada, this RFP is intended to include municipalities and publicly- funded academic institutions, schools boards, health authorities, and social services (MASH 5 sectors). In addition this RFP is intended to include current and potential Members of the Rural Municipalities of Alberta (RMA), and their represented Associations (SARM, SUMA and AMM). C. WHY RESPOND TO A NATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROCUREMENT CONTRACT 3.6 National Cooperative Procurement Contracts create value for Municipal and Public Agencies, as well as for Vendors of products/equipment and services in a variety of ways: 3.6.1 National cooperative contracts potentially save time and effort for municipal and public agencies, who otherwise would have to solicit vendor responses to individual RFPs, resulting in individual contracts, to meet the procurement needs of their respective agencies. Considerable time and effort is also potentially saved by the Vendors who would have had to otherwise respond to each of those individual RFPs. A single, nationally advertised RFP, resulting in a single, national cooperative contract can potentially replace thousands of individual RFPs for the same equipment/products/services that might have been otherwise advertised by individual Sourcewell member agencies. 3.6.2 Sourcewell contracts offer our Members nationally leveraged volume purchasing discounts. Our contract terms and conditions offer the opportunity for Vendors to recognize individual member procurement volume commitment through additional volume based contract discounts. 3.7 State laws that permit or encourage cooperative purchasing contracts do so with the belief that cooperative efficiencies will result in lower prices, better overall value, and considerable time savings. 3.8 The collective purchasing power of thousands of Sourcewell Member agencies nationwide offers the opportunity for volume pricing discounts. Although no sales or sales volume is guaranteed by a Sourcewell Contract resulting from this RFP, substantial volume is anticipated and volume pricing is requested and justified. 3.9 Sourcewell and its Members desire the best value for their procurement dollar as well as a competitive price. Vendors have the opportunity to display and highlight value-added attributes of their company, equipment/products and services without constraints of a typical individual proposal process. D. THE INTENT OF THIS RFP 3.10. National contract awarded by Sourcewell: Sourcewell seeks the most responsive and responsible Vendor relationship(s) to reflect the best interests of Sourcewell and its Member agencies. Through a competitive proposal and evaluation process, the Sourcewell Proposal Evaluation Committee recommends vendors for a national contract awarded by the action of the Sourcewell Chief Procurement Officer. Sourcewell’s primary intent is to establish and provide a national cooperative procurement contract that offer opportunities for Sourcewell and our current and potential Member agencies throughout the United States and Canada to procure quality product/equipment and services as desired and needed. The contracts will be marketed nationally through a cooperative effort between the awarded vendor(s) and Sourcewell. Contracts are expected to offer price levels reflective of the potential and collective volume of Sourcewell and the nationally established Sourcewell membership base. 3.11 Beyond our primary intent, Sourcewell further desires to: 3.11.1 Award a four-year contract with a fifth-year contract option resulting from this RFP. Any fifth-year extension is exercised at Sourcewell’s discretion and results from Sourcewell’s contracting needs or from Member requests; this extension is not intended merely to accommodate an awarded Vendor’s request. If Sourcewell grants a fifth-year extension, it may also terminate the contract (or cause it to expire) within the fifth year if the extended 6 contract is replaced by a resolicited or newly solicited contract. In exigent circumstances, Sourcewell may petition Sourcewell’s Board of Directors to extend the contract term beyond five years. This rarely used procedure should be employed only to avoid a gap in contract coverage while a replacement contract is being solicited; 3.11.2 Offer and apply any applicable technological advances throughout the term of a contract resulting from this RFP; 3.11.3 Deliver “Value Added” aspects of the company, equipment/products and services as defined in the “Proposer’s Response”; 3.11.4 Deliver a wide spectrum of solutions to meet the needs and requirements of Sourcewell and Sourcewell Member agencies; and 3.11.5 Award an exclusive contract to the most responsive and responsible vendor when it is deemed to be in the best interest of Sourcewell and the Sourcewell Member agencies. 3.12 Exclusive or Multiple Awards: Based on the scope of this RFP and on the responses received, Sourcewell may award either an exclusive contract or multiple contracts. In some circumstances, a single national supplier may best meet the needs of Sourcewell Members; in other situations, multiple vendors may be in the best interests of Sourcewell and the Sourcewell Members and preferred by Sourcewell to provide the widest array of solutions to meet the member agency’s needs. Sourcewell retains sole discretion to determine which approach is in the best interests of Sourcewell Member agencies. 3.13 Non-Manufacturer Awards: Sourcewell reserves the right to make an award under this RFP to a non-manufacturer or dealer/distributor if such action is in the best interests of Sourcewell and its Members. 3.14 Manufacturer as a Proposer: If the Proposer is a manufacturer or wholesale distributor, the response received will be evaluated on the basis of a response made in conjunction with that manufacturer’s authorized dealer network. Unless stated otherwise, a manufacturer or wholesale distributor Proposer is assumed to have a documented relationship with their dealer network where that dealer network is informed of, and authorized to accept, purchase orders pursuant to any Contract resulting from this RFP on behalf of the manufacturer or wholesale distributor Proposer. Any such dealer will be considered a sub-contractor of the Proposer/Vendor. The relationship between the manufacturer and wholesale distributor Proposer and its dealer network may be proposed at the time of the submission if that fact is properly identified. 3.15 Dealer/Reseller as a Proposer: If the Proposer is a dealer or reseller of the products and/or services being proposed, the response will be evaluated based on the Proposer’s authorization to provide those products and services from their manufacturer. When requested by Sourcewell, Proposers must document their authority to offer those products and/or services. E. SCOPE OF THIS RFP 3.16 Scope: The scope of this RFP is to award a contract to a qualifying vendor defined as a manufacturer, provider, or dealer/distributor, established as a Proposer, and deemed responsive and responsible through our open and competitive proposal process. Vendors will be awarded contracts based on the proposal and responders demonstrated ability to meet the expectations of the RFP and demonstrate the overall highest valued solutions which meet and/or exceed the current and future needs and requirements of Sourcewell and its Member agencies nationally within the scope of HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES. 3.17 Additional Scope Definitions: In addition to HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES, this solicitation should be read to include, but not to be limited to: 7 3.17.1 Subject to section 3.17.2 below, the following types of heavy construction equipment: wheeled, tracked, and backhoe loaders, motor graders, wheeled and tracked excavators, bulldozers, compactors, scrapers, articulated and rigid haulers, cranes, highway-class asphalt pavers, screeds, pavement milling machines, and rollers. 3.17.2 A Proposer must meet at least one of the following four requirements to be considered within scope of this solicitation. For purposes of Section 3.17.2 and it’s subsections, the term “published” means that the information is readily available through the proposer’s printed literature or website and that the proposer has verified the accuracy of the information: 3.17.2.1 At least one wheel loader with published net horsepower (HP) of at least 330 HP, and a crawler excavator with published net HP of at least 500 HP and maximum operating weight of at least 150,000 lbs. 3.17.2.2 At least one motor grader with a published maximum operating weight of at least 30,000 lbs. 3.17.2.3 At least one crane with a published maximum lifting capacity of at least 300 tons and a published maximum boom length of at least 150 feet. 3.17.2.4 At least one highway-class asphalt paver with a published maximum operating weight of at least 19,000 lbs. 3.17.3 Sourcewell reserves the right to limit the scope of this solicitation for Sourcewell and current and potential Sourcewell member agencies. 3.17.3.1 This solicitation should NOT be construed to include any of the following: a. Construction services b. Equipment accessory, attachment and supply only solutions, or c. Vendors whose primary business is covered under categories included in the following Sourcewell RFPs: i. Medium Construction Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments, and Supplies (See Sourcewell RFP #042815) ii. Portable Construction and Maintenance Equipment and Trailers with Related Accessories, Attachments, and Supplies (See Sourcewell RFP #052015) iii. Grounds Maintenance Equipment, Attachments, Accessories, and Related Services (See Sourcewell RFP #062117) iv. Forklifts, Lift Trucks, and Related Material Handling Equipment, Attachments, Accessories, and Services (See Sourcewell RFP #101816) v. Roadway Maintenance Equipment with Related Accessories, Attachments, Materials, and Supplies (See Sourcewell RFP #052417) vi. Public Utility Equipment with Related Accessories and Supplies (See Sourcewell #012418) 3.18 Overlap of Scope: When considering equipment/products/services, or groups of equipment/ products/services submitted as a part of your response, and whether inclusion of such will fall within a “Scope of Proposal,” please consider the validity of an inverse statement. 3.18.1 For example, pencils and post-it-notes can generally be classified as office supplies and office supplies generally include pencils and post-it-notes. 8 3.18.2 In contrast, computers (PCs and peripherals) can generally be considered office supplies; however, the scope of office supplies does not generally include computer servers and infrastructure. 3.18.3 In conclusion: With this in mind, individual products and services must be examined individually by Sourcewell, from time to time and in its sole discretion, to determine their compliance and fall within the original “Scope” as intended by Sourcewell. 3.19 Best and Most Responsive – Responsible Proposer: It is the intent of Sourcewell to award a Contract to the best and most responsible and responsive Proposer(s) offering the best overall quality and selection of equipment/products and services meeting the commonly requested specifications of Sourcewell and Sourcewell Members, provided the Proposer’s Response has been submitted in accordance with the requirements of this RFP. Qualifying Proposers who are able to anticipate the current and future needs and requirements of Sourcewell and Sourcewell member agencies; demonstrate the knowledge of any and all applicable industry standards, laws and regulations; and possess the willingness and ability to distribute, market to and service Sourcewell Members in all 50 states are preferred. Sourcewell requests proposers submit their entire line of products and services as it applies and relates to the scope of this RFP. 3.20 Sealed Proposals: Sourcewell will receive sealed proposal responses to this RFP in accordance with accepted standards set forth in the Minnesota Procurement Code and Uniform Municipal Contracting Law. Awards may be made to responsible and responsive Proposers whose proposals are determined in writing to be the most advantageous to Sourcewell and its current or qualifying future Sourcewell Member agencies. 3.21 Use of Contract: Any Contract resulting from this solicitation shall be awarded with the understanding that it is for the sole convenience of Sourcewell and its Members. Sourcewell and/or its members reserve the right to obtain like equipment/products and services solely from this contract or from another contract source of their choice or from a contract resulting from their own procurement process. 3.22 Awarded Vendor’s interest in a contract resulting from this RFP: Awarded Vendors will be able to offer to Sourcewell, and current and potential Sourcewell Members, only those products/equipment and services specifically awarded on their Sourcewell Awarded Contract(s). Awarded Vendors may not offer as “contract compliant,” products/equipment and services which are not specifically identified and priced in their Sourcewell Awarded Contract. 3.23 Sole Source of Responsibility- Sourcewell desires a “Sole Source of Responsibility” Vendor. This means that the Vendor will take sole responsibility for the performance of delivered equipment/products/ services. Sourcewell also desires sole responsibility with regard to: 3.23.1 Scope of Equipment/Products/Services: Sourcewell desires a provider for the broadest possible scope of products/equipment and services being proposed over the largest possible geographic area and to the largest possible cross-section of Sourcewell current and potential Members. 3.23.2 Vendor use of sub-contractors in sourcing or delivering equipment/product/services: Sourcewell desires a single source of responsibility for equipment/products and services proposed. Proposers are assumed to have sub-contractor relationships with all organizations and individuals whom are external to the Proposer and are involved in providing or delivering the equipment/products/services being proposed. Vendor assumes all responsibility for the equipment/products/services and actions of any such Sub-Contractor. Suggested Solutions Options include: 3.23.3 Multiple solutions to the needs of Sourcewell and Sourcewell Members are possible. Examples could include: 9 3.23.3.1 Equipment/Products Only Solution: Equipment/Products Only Solution may be appropriate for situations where Sourcewell or Sourcewell Members possess the ability, either in-house or through local third party contractors, to properly install and bring to operation those equipment/products being proposed. 3.23.3.2 Turn-Key Solutions: A Turn-Key Solution is a combination of equipment/products and services that provides a single price for equipment/products, delivery, and installation to a properly operating status. Generally this is the most desirable solution because Sourcewell and Sourcewell Members may not possess, or desire to engage, personnel with the necessary expertise to complete these tasks internally or through other independent contractors. 3.23.3.3 Good, Better, Best: Where appropriate and properly identified, Proposers may offer the choice “of good, better, best” multiple-grade solutions to meet Sourcewell Members’ needs. 3.23.3.4 Proven – Accepted – Leading-Edge Technology: Where appropriate and properly identified, Proposers may provide a spectrum of technology solutions to complement or enhance the proposed solutions to meet Sourcewell Members’ needs. 3.23.4 If applicable, Contracts will be awarded to Proposer(s) able to deliver a proposal meeting the entire needs of Sourcewell and its Members within the scope of this RFP. Sourcewell prefers Proposers submit their complete product line of products and services described in the scope of this RFP. Sourcewell reserves the right to reject individual, or groupings of specific equipment/products and services proposals as a part of the award. 3.24 Geographic Area to be Proposed: This RFP invites proposals to provide HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES to Sourcewell and Sourcewell Members throughout the entire United States and possibly internationally. Proposers will be expected to express willingness to explore service to Sourcewell Members located abroad; however the lack of ability to serve Members outside of the United States will not be cause for non-award. The ability and willingness to serve Canada, for instance, will be viewed as a value-added attribute. 3.25 Contract Term: At Sourcewell’s option, a Contract resulting from this RFP will become effective either on the date awarded by the Sourcewell Executive Director and Chief Procurement Officer or on the day following the expiration date of an existing Sourcewell procurement contract for the same or similar product/equipment and services. 3.25.1 Sourcewell is seeking a Contract base term of four years as allowed by Minnesota Contracting Law. Full term is expected. However, one additional one-year renewal/extension may be offered by Sourcewell to Vendor beyond the original four year term if Sourcewell deems such action to be in the best interests of Sourcewell and its Members. Sourcewell reserves the right to conduct periodic business reviews throughout the term of the contract. 3.26 Minimum Contract Value: Sourcewell anticipates considerable activity resulting from this RFP and subsequent award; however, no commitment of any kind is made concerning actual quantities to be acquired. Sourcewell does not guarantee usage. Usage will depend on the actual needs of the Sourcewell Members and the value of the awarded contract. 3.27 [This section is intentionally blank.] 3.28 Contract Availability: This Contract must be available to all current and potential Sourcewell Members who choose to utilize this Sourcewell Contract to include all governmental and public agencies, public and private primary and secondary education agencies, and all non-profit organizations nationally. 10 3.28.1 With respect to Members within the Commonwealth of Virginia, this RFP is intended to be a “joint procurement agreement” as described in Vir. Code § 2.2-4304(A), and those Virginia Members identified in Appendix C must be allowed to use this Contract as a Joint Purchaser. 3.28.2 For Members within Canada, this RFP is intended to include municipalities and publicly- funded academic institutions, schools boards, health authorities, and social services (MASH sectors). In addition this RFP is intended to include current and potential Members of the Rural Municipalities of Alberta (RMA), and their represented Associations (SARM, SUMA and AMM). 3.29 Proposer’s Commitment Period: In order to allow Sourcewell the opportunity to evaluate each proposal thoroughly, Sourcewell requires any response to this solicitation be valid and irrevocable for ninety (90) days after the date proposals are opened. F. EXPECTATIONS FOR EQUIPMENT/PRODUCTS AND SERVICES BEING PROPOSED 3.30 Industry Standards: Except as contained herein, the specifications or solutions for this RFP shall be those accepted guidelines set forth by the HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES industry, as they are generally understood and accepted within that industry across the nation. Submitted products/equipment, related services and accessories, and their warranties and assurances are required to meet and/or exceed all current, traditional and anticipated standards, needs, expectations, and requirements of Sourcewell and its Members. 3.30.1 Deviations from industry standards must be identified by the Proposer and explained how, in their opinion, the equipment/products and services they propose will render equivalent functionality, coverage, performance, and/or related services. Failure to detail all such deviations may comprise sufficient grounds for rejection of the entire proposal. 3.30.2 Technical Descriptions/Specifications. Excessive technical descriptions and specifications that unduly enlarge the proposal response may cause Sourcewell to reduce the evaluation points awarded on Form G. Proposers must supply sufficient information to: 3.30.2.1 demonstrate the Proposer’s knowledge of industry standards and Member agency needs and expectations; 3.30.2.2 Identify the equipment/products and services being proposed as applicable to the needs and expectations of Sourcewell Member agencies; and 3.30.2.3 differentiate equipment/products and services from other industry manufacturers and providers. 3.31 New Current Model Equipment/Products: Proposals submitted shall be for new, current model equipment/products and services with the exception of certain close-out products allowed to be offered on the Proposer’s “Hot List” described herein. 3.32 Compliance with laws and standards: All items supplied on this Contract shall comply with any current applicable safety or regulatory standards or codes. 3.33 Delivered and operational: Products/equipment offered herein are to be proposed based upon being delivered and operational at the Sourcewell Member’s site. Exceptions to “delivered and operational” must be clearly disclosed in the “Total Cost of Acquisition” section of the proposal. 3.34 Warranty: The Proposer warrants that all products, equipment, supplies, and services delivered under this Contract shall be covered by the industry standard or better warranty. All products and equipment should carry a minimum industry standard manufacturer’s warranty that includes materials and labor. The Proposer has the primary responsibility to submit product specific warranty as required and accepted by 11 industry standards. Dealer/Distributors agree to assist the purchaser in reaching a solution in a dispute over warranty’s terms with the manufacturer. Any manufacturer’s warranty that is effective past the expiration of the warranty will be passed on to the Sourcewell member. Failure to submit a minimum warranty may result in non-award. 3.35 Additional Warrants: The Proposer warrants that all products/equipment and related services furnished hereunder will be free from liens and encumbrances; defects in design, materials, and workmanship; and will conform in all respects to the terms of this RFP including any specifications or standards. In addition, Proposer/Vendor warrants the products/equipment and related services are suitable for and will perform in accordance with the ordinary use for which they are intended. G. SOLUTIONS-BASED SOLICITATION 3.36 The Sourcewell solicitation and contract award process is not based on detailed specifications. Instead, this RFP is a “Solutions-Based Solicitation.” Sourcewell expects respondents to understand and anticipate the current and future needs of Sourcewell and its members—within the scope of this RFP—and to propose solutions that are commonly desired or required by law or industry standards. Proposal will be evaluated in part on your demonstrated ability to meet or exceed the needs and requirements of Sourcewell and our member agencies within the defined scope of this RFP. 3.37 While Sourcewell does not typically provide product and service specifications, the RFP may contain scope refinements and industry-specific questions. Where specific items are specified, those items should be considered the minimum required, which the proposal can exceed in order to meet Members’ needs. Sourcewell may award all of the respondent’s proposal or may limit the award to a subset of the proposal. 3 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING YOUR PROPOSAL A. INQUIRY PERIOD 4.1 The inquiry period begins on the date of first advertisement and continues until to the Deadline for Submission.” RFP packages will be distributed to potential Vendors during the inquiry period. B. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE 4.2 A pre-proposal conference will be held at the date and time specified in the timeline on page one of this RFP. Conference information will be sent to all potential Proposers, and attendance is optional. The purpose of this conference is to allow potential Proposers to ask questions regarding this RFP and Sourcewell’s competitive contracting process. Only answers issued by written addendum by Sourcewell to questions asked before the deadline for questions are binding on the parties to an awarded contract. C. IDENTIFICATION OF KEY PERSONNEL 4.3 Awarded Vendors will designate one senior staff member to represent the Vendor to Sourcewell. This contact person will correspond with members for technical assistance, questions, or concerns that may arise, including instructions regarding different contacts for different geographical areas or product lines. 4.4 These designated individuals should also act as the primary contact for marketing, sales, and any other area deemed essential by the Proposer and Sourcewell. D. PROPOSER’S EXCEPTIONS TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS 4.5 Any exceptions, deviations, or contingencies regarding this RFP that a Proposer requests must be documented on Form C, Exceptions To Proposal, Terms, Conditions And Solutions Request. 12 4.6 Exceptions, deviations or contingencies requested in the Proposer’s response, while possibly necessary in the view of the Proposer, may result in lower scoring or disqualification of a proposal. E. PROPOSAL FORMAT 4.7 All Proposers must examine the entire RFP package to seek clarification of any item or requirement that may not be clear and to check all responses for accuracy before submitting a proposal. 4.8 All proposals must be properly labeled and sent to “Sourcewell, 202 12th Street NE Staples, MN 56479.” 4.9 All proposals must be physically delivered to Sourcewell at the above address with all required hard copy documents and signature forms/pages inserted as loose pages at the front of the Vendor’s response. The proposal must include these items. 4.9.1 Hard copy original of completed, signed, and dated Forms C, D, F; hard copy of the signed signature-page only from Forms A and P from this RFP; 4.9.2 Signed hard copies of all addenda issued for the RFP; 4.9.3 Hard copy of Certificate of Insurance verifying the coverage identified in this RFP; and 4.9.4 A complete copy of your response on a flash drive (or other approved electronic means). The electronic copy must contain completed Forms A, B, C, D, F, and P, your statement of products and pricing (including apparent discount), and all appropriate attachments. In order to ensure that your full response is evaluated, you must provide an electronic version of any material that you provide in a hard copy format. As a public agency, Sourcewell’s proposals, responses, and awarded contracts are a matter of public record, except for such data that is classified as nonpublic. Accordingly, public data is available for review through a properly submitted public records request. To redact nonpublic information from your proposal (under Minnesota Statute §13.37), you must make your request within thirty (30) days of the contract award or non-award date. 4.10 All Proposal forms must be submitted in English and must be legible. All appropriate forms must be executed by an authorized signatory of the Proposer. Blue ink is preferred for signatures. 4.11 Proposal submissions should be submitted using the electronic forms provided. Proposers that use alternative documents are responsible for ensuring that the content is substantially similar to the Sourcewell form and that the document is readable by Sourcewell. 4.12 The Proposer must ensure that the proposal is in the physical possession of Sourcewell before the submission deadline. 4.12.1 Proposals must be submitted in a sealed envelope or box properly addressed to Sourcewell and prominently identifying the proposal number, proposal category name, the message “Hold for Proposal Opening,” and the deadline for proposal submission. Sourcewell is not responsible for untimely proposals. Proposals received by the deadline for proposal submission will be opened and the name of each Proposer and other appropriate information will be publicly read. 4.13 Proposers are responsible for checking directly on the Sourcewell website for any addendums to this RFP. Addendums to this RFP can change the terms and conditions of the RFP, including the proposal submission deadline. F. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THIS RFP 13 4.14 Upon examination of this RFP document, Proposers should promptly notify Sourcewell of any ambiguity, inconsistency, or error they may discover. Interpretations, corrections, and changes to this RFP will be considered by Sourcewell through a written addendum. Interpretations, corrections, or changes that are made in any other manner are not binding, and Proposers must not rely on them. 4.15 Submit all questions about this RFP, in writing, referencing HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES to James Voelker at Sourcewell, 202 12th Street NE, Staples, MN 56479 or to RFP@sourcewell-mn.gov. You may also call James Voelker at 218-895-4191. Sourcewell urges potential Proposers to communicate all concerns well in advance of the submission deadline to avoid misunderstandings. Questions received within seven (7) days before the submission deadline generally cannot be answered. Sourcewell may, however, field purely procedural questions, questions about Sourcewell-issued addenda, or questions involving a Proposer withdrawing its response before the RFP submission deadline. 4.16 If Sourcewell deems that its answer to a question has a material impact on other potential Proposers or on the RFP itself, Sourcewell will create an addendum to this RFP. 4.17 If Sourcewell deems that its answer to a question merely clarifies the existing terms and conditions and does not have a material impact on other potential Proposers or the RFP itself, no further documentation of that question is required. 4.18 Addenda are written instruments issued by Sourcewell that modify or interpret the RFP. All addenda issued by Sourcewell become a part of the RFP. Addenda will be delivered to all Potential Proposers using the same method of delivery of the original RFP material. Sourcewell accepts no liability in connection with the delivery of any addenda. Copies of addenda will also be made available on the Sourcewell website at www.sourcewell-mn.gov (under “Solicitations”) and from the Sourcewell offices. All Proposers must acknowledge their receipt of all addenda in their proposal response. 4.19 Any amendment to a submitted proposal must be in writing and must be delivered to Sourcewell by the RFP submission deadline. 4.20 through 4.21 [These sections are intentionally blank.] G. MODIFICATION OR WITHDRAWAL OF A SUBMITTED PROPOSAL 4.22 A submitted proposal must not be modified, withdrawn, or cancelled by the Proposer for a period of ninety (90) days following the date proposals were opened. Before the deadline for submission of proposals, any proposal submitted may be modified or withdrawn by notice to the Sourcewell Procurement Manager. Such notice must be submitted in writing and must include the signature of the Proposer. The notice must be delivered to Sourcewell before the deadline for submission of proposals and must be so worded as not to reveal the content of the original proposal. The original proposal will not be physically returned to the potential Proposer until after the official proposal opening. Withdrawn proposals may be resubmitted up to the time designated for the receipt of the proposals if they fully conform with the proposal instructions. H. PROPOSAL OPENING PROCEDURE 4.23 Sealed and properly identified responses for this RFP entitled HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES will be received by Chris Robinson, Procurement Manager, at Sourcewell Offices, 202 12th Street NE, Staples, MN 56479 until the deadline identified on page one of this RFP. All Proposal responses must be submitted in a sealed package. The outside of the package must plainly identify HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES and the RFP number. To avoid premature opening, the Proposer must label the Proposal response properly. Sourcewell documents the receipt of proposals by immediately time- and date-stamping them. At the time of the public opening, 14 the Sourcewell Director of Procurement or a representative from the Sourcewell Proposal Evaluation Committee will read the Proposer’s names aloud and will determine whether each submission has met Level-1 responsiveness. I. SOURCEWELL’S RIGHTS RESERVED 4.24 Sourcewell may exercise the following rights with regard to the RFP. 4.24.1 Reject any and all proposals received in response to this RFP; 4.24.2 Disqualify any Proposer whose conduct or proposal fails to conform to the requirements of this RFP; 4.24.3 Duplicate without limitation all materials submitted for purposes of RFP evaluation, and duplicate all public information in response to data requests regarding the proposal; 4.24.4 Consider and accept for evaluation a late modification of a proposal if 1) the proposal itself was submitted on time, 2) the modifications were requested by Sourcewell, and 3) the modifications make the terms of the proposal more favorable to Sourcewell or its members; 4.24.5 Waive any non-material deviations from the requirements and procedures of this RFP; 4.24.6 Extend the Contract, in increments determined by Sourcewell, not to exceed a total Contract term of five years; 4.24.7 Cancel the Request for Proposal at any time and for any reason with no cost or penalty to Sourcewell; 4.24.8 Correct or amend the RFP at any time with no cost or penalty to Sourcewell. If Sourcewell corrects or amends any segment of the RFP after submission of proposals and before the announcement of the awarded Vendor, all proposers will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to revise their proposals in order to accommodate the RFP amendment and the new submission dates. Sourcewell will not be liable for any errors in the RFP or other responses related to the RFP; and 4.24.9 Extend proposal due dates. 5 PRICING 5.1 Sourcewell requests that potential Proposers respond to this RFP only if they are able to offer a wide array of products and services at lower prices and with better value than what they would ordinarily offer to a single government agency, a school district, or a regional cooperative. 5.2 This RFP requests pricing for an indefinite quantity of products or related services with potential national sales distribution and service. While most RFP categories represent significant sales opportunities, Sourcewell makes no guarantees about the quantity of products or services that members will purchase. The estimated annual value of this contract is $200 Million. Vendors are expected to anticipate additional volume through potential government, educational, and not- for-profit agencies that would find value in a national contract awarded by Sourcewell. 5.3 Regardless of the payment method selected by Sourcewell or an Sourcewell member, the total cost associated with any purchase option of the products and services must always be disclosed in the proposal and at the time of purchase. 15 5.4 All proposers must submit “Primary Pricing” in the form of either “Line-Item Pricing,” or “Percentage Discount from Catalog Pricing,” or a combination of these pricing strategies. Proposers are also encouraged to offer optional pricing strategies such as “Hot List,” “Sourced Products,” and “Volume Discounts,” as well as financing options such as leasing. All pricing documents should include a clear effective date. A. LINE-ITEM PRICING 5.5 Line-item pricing is a pricing format in which individual products or services are offered at specific Contract prices. Products or services are individually priced and described by characteristics such as manufacture name, stock or part number, size, or functionality. This method of pricing may offer the least amount of confusion, but Proposers with a large number of items may find this method cumbersome. In these situations, a percentage discount from catalog or category pricing model may make more sense and may increase the clarity of the contract pricing format. 5.6 All line-item pricing items must be numbered, organized, sectioned (including SKUs, when applicable), and prepared to be easily understood by the Evaluation Committee and members. 5.7 Submit Line-Item Pricing items in an Excel spreadsheet format and include all appropriate identification information necessary to discern the line item from other line items in each Responder’s proposal. 5.8 Line-item pricing must be submitted to Sourcewell in a searchable spreadsheet format (e.g., Microsoft® Excel®) in order to facilitate quickly finding any particular item of interest. For that reason, Proposers are responsible for providing the appropriate product and service identification information along with the pricing information that is typically found on an invoice or price quote for such product or services. 5.9 All products or services typically appearing on an invoice or price quote must be individually priced and identified on the line-item price sheet, including any and all ancillary costs. 5.10 Proposers should provide both a published “List Price” as well as a “Proposed Contract Price” in their pricing matrix. Published List Price will be the standard “quantity of one” price currently available to government and educational customers, excluding cooperative and volume discounts. B. PERCENTAGE DISCOUNT FROM CATALOG OR CATEGORY 5.11 This pricing model involves a specific percentage discount from a catalog or list price, defined as a published Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) for the products or services being proposed. 5.12 Individualized percentage discounts can be applied to any number of defined product groupings. 5.13 A percentage discount from MSRP may be applied to all elements identified in MSRP, including all manufacturer options applicable to the products or services. 5.14 When a Proposer elects to use “Percentage Discount from Catalog or Category,” Proposer will be responsible for providing and maintaining current published MSRP with Sourcewell, and this pricing must be included in its proposal and provided throughout the term of any Contract resulting from this RFP. C. COST PLUS A PERCENTAGE OF COST 5.15 “Cost plus a percentage of cost” as a primary pricing mechanism is not desirable. It is, however, acceptable for pricing sourced goods or services. D. HOT LIST PRICING 5.16 Where applicable, a Vendor may opt to offer a specific selection of products or services, defined as “Hot List” pricing, at greater discounts than those listed in the standard Contract pricing. All product and 16 service pricing, including the Hot List Pricing, must be submitted electronically in a format that is acceptable to Sourcewell. Hot List pricing must be submitted in a line-item format. Products and services may be added or removed from the Hot List at any time through an Sourcewell Price and Product Change Form. 5.17 Hot List program and pricing may also be used to discount and liquidate close-out and discontinued products and services as long as those close-out and discontinued items are clearly labeled as such. Current ordering process and administrative fees apply. This option must be published and made available to all Sourcewell Members. E. CEILING PRICE 5.18 Proposal pricing is to be established as a ceiling price. At no time may the proposed products or services be offered under this Contract at prices above this ceiling price without a specific request and approval by Sourcewell. Contract prices may be reduced at any time, for example, to reflect volume discounts or to meet the needs of an Sourcewell Member. 5.19 [This section is intentionally blank.] F. VOLUME PRICE DISCOUNTS / ADDITIONAL QUANTITIES 5.20 through 5.23 [These sections are intentionally blank.] G. TOTAL COST OF ACQUISITION 5.24 The Total Cost of Acquisition for the equipment/products and related services being proposed, including those payable by Sourcewell Members to either the Proposer or a third party, is the cost of the proposed equipment/products product/equipment and related services delivered and operational for its intended purpose in the end-user’s location. For example, if you are proposing equipment/products FOB Proposer’s dock, your proposal should reflect that the contract pricing does not provide for delivery beyond Proposer’s dock, nor any set-up activities or costs associated with those delivery or set-up activities. Any additional costs for delivery and set-up should be clearly disclosed. In contrast, a proposal could state that there are no additional costs of acquisition if the product is delivered to and operational at the end-user’s location. H. SOURCED GOOD or OPEN MARKET ITEM 5.25 A Sourced Good or an Open Market Item is a product that a member wants to buy under contract that is not currently available under the Vendor’s Sourcewell contract. This method of procurement can be satisfied through a contract sourcing process. Sourcing options serve to provide a more complete contract solution to meet our members’ needs. Sourced items are generally deemed incidental to the total transaction or purchase of contract items. 5.26 Sourcewell or Sourcewell Members may request products, equipment, and related services that are within the related scope of this RFP, even if they are not included in an awarded Vendor’s line-item price list or catalog. These items are known as Sourced Goods or Open Market Items. 5.27 An awarded Vendor may source such items to the extent that the items are identified as “Sourced Products/Equipment” or “Open Market Items” on any quotation issued in reference to an Sourcewell awarded contract, and that this information is provided to either Sourcewell or an Sourcewell Member. Sourcewell is not responsible for determining whether a Sourced Good is an incidental portion of the overall purchase or whether a Member is able to consider a Sourced Good a purchase under a Sourcewell contract. 5.28 “Cost plus a percentage” pricing is an acceptable option in pricing of Sourced Goods. 17 I. PRODUCT & PRICE CHANGES 5.29 Awarded Vendors may request product or service changes, additions, or deletions at any time throughout the contract term. All requests must be made in written format by completing the Sourcewell Price and Product Change Request Form (located at the end of this RFP and on the Sourcewell website), signed by an authorized Vendor representative. All changes are subject to review and approval by Sourcewell. Submit your requests through email to your assigned Contract Manager and to PandP@sourcewell-mn.gov. 5.30 Sourcewell will determine whether the request is both within the scope of the original RFP and in the best interests of Sourcewell and Sourcewell Members. Approved Price and Product Change Request Forms will be returned to the Vendor contact through email. 5.31 The Vendor must 1) complete this change request form and individually list or attach all items subject to change, 2) provide a sufficiently detailed explanation and documentation for the change, and 3) include a compete restatement of pricing document in appropriate format (preferably Excel). The pricing document must identify all products and services being offered and must conform to the following Sourcewell product and price change naming convention: (Vendor Name) (Sourcewell Contract #) (effective pricing date); for example, “COMPANY 012411-CPY effective 02-12-2016.” 5.32 The new pricing restatement must include all products and services offered, even for those items whose pricing remains unchanged, and must include a new effective date on the pricing documents. This requirement reduces confusion by providing a single, current pricing sheet for each vendor and creates a historical record of pricing. 5.33 ADDITIONS. New products and related services may be added to a Contract resulting from this RFP at any time during that Contract term to the extent that those products and related services are within the scope of this RFP. Allowable new products and related services generally include updated models of products and enhanced services that reflect new technology and improved functionality. 5.34 DELETIONS. New products and related services may be deleted from a contract if an item is no longer available. 5.35 PRICE CHANGES. A Vendor may request pricing changes by providing reasonable justification for the change. For example, a request for a 3% increase in a product line that relies heavily on petroleum products may be reasonable if the raw cost of required petroleum products has increased substantially. Conversely, a request for a 3% increase in prices based only on a 3% increase in a cost-of-living index may be considered unreasonable. Although Sourcewell is sensitive to the possibility of fluctuations in raw material costs, prospective Vendors should make every reasonable attempt to account for normal cost changes by proposing pricing that will be effective throughout the duration of the four-year Contract. 5.35.1 Price decreases: Sourcewell expects Vendors to propose their very best prices and anticipates price reductions that are due to advancement in technology and marketplace efficiencies. 5.35.2 Price increases: A Vendor must include reasonable documentation for price-increase requests, along with both current and proposed pricing. Appropriate documentation should be attached to the Price and Product Change Request Form, including letters from suppliers announcing price increases. Price increases must not exceed the industry standard. 5.36 through 5.37 [These sections are intentionally blank.] 5.38 Proposers representing multiple manufacturers, or carrying multiple related product lines may also request the addition of new manufacturers or product lines to their Contract to the extent they remain within the scope of this RFP. 18 5.39 through 5.43 [These sections are intentionally blank.] K. SALES TAX 5.44 Sales and other taxes should not be included in the prices quoted. The Vendor will charge state and local sales and other applicable taxes on items for which a valid tax-exemption certification has not been provided. Each Sourcewell Member is responsible for providing verification of tax-exempt status to the Vendor. When ordering, Sourcewell Members must indicate that they are tax-exempt entities. Except as set forth herein, no party is responsible for taxes imposed on another party as a result of or arising from the transactions under a Contract resulting from this RFP. L. SHIPPING 5.45 Shipping costs can constitute a significant portion of the overall cost of procurement. Consequently, significant weight will be given to the quality of a prospective Vendor’s shipping program. Shipping charges should reasonably reflect the actual cost of shipping. Sourcewell understands that Vendors may use other shipping cost methods for simplicity or for transparency. But to the extent that shipping costs are determined to disproportionately increase a Vendor’s profit, Sourcewell may reduce the points awarded in the “Pricing” criteria. 5.46 through 5.47 [These sections are intentionally blank.] 5.48 All shipping and restocking fees must be identified in the price program. Certain industries providing made-to-order products may not allow returns. Proposals will be evaluated not only on the actual costs of shipping, but on the relative flexibility extended to Sourcewell Members relating to restocking fees, shipping errors, customized shipping requirements, the process for rejecting damaged or delayed shipments, and similar subjects. 5.49 through 5.50 [These sections are intentionally blank.] 5.51 Delivered products must be properly packaged. Damaged products may be rejected. If the damage is not readily apparent at the time of delivery, the Vendor must permit the products to be returned within a reasonable time at no cost to Sourcewell or Sourcewell Members. Sourcewell and Sourcewell Members reserve the right to inspect the products at a reasonable time subsequent to delivery where circumstances or conditions prevent effective inspection of the products at the time of delivery. 5.52 The Vendor must deliver Contract-conforming products in each shipment and may not substitute products without the express approval from Sourcewell or the Sourcewell Member. 5.53 Sourcewell reserves the right to declare a breach of Contract if the Vendor intentionally delivers substandard or inferior products that are not under Contract and described in its paper or electronic price lists or sourced upon request of any Member under this Contract. In the event of the delivery of nonconforming products, the Sourcewell Member will notify the Vendor as soon as possible and the Vendor will replace nonconforming products with conforming products that are acceptable to the Sourcewell member. 5.54 Throughout the term of the Contract, Proposer agrees to pay for return shipment on products that arrive in a defective or inoperable condition. Proposer must arrange for the return shipment of the damaged products. 6 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS 19 A. PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS 6.1 The Sourcewell proposal evaluation committee will evaluate proposals received based on a 1,000 point evaluation system. The committee establishes both the evaluation criteria and designates the relative weight of each criterion by assigning possible scores for each category on Form G of this RFP. The committee may adjust the relative weight of the criteria for each RFP. (For example, if the “Warranty” criterion does not apply to a particular RFP, the points normally awarded under “Warranty” may be used to increase the number of potential points in another evaluation category or categories.) The “Pricing” criterion will contain at least a plurality of points for every RFP. 6.2 Sourcewell uses a scoring system that gives primary importance to “Pricing.” But pricing includes more than just the absolute lowest initial cost of purchasing, for example, a particular product. Other considerations include the total cost of the acquisition and whether the Proposer’s offering represents the best value. The evaluation committee may consider such factors as life-cycle costs, total cost of ownership, quality, and the suitability of an offering in meeting Sourcewell Members’ needs. Pricing points may be awarded based on pricing clarity and ease of use. Sourcewell may also award points based on whether a response contains exceptions, exclusions, or limitations of liabilities. 6.3 The Sourcewell Executive Director and Chief Procurement Officer will consider making awards to the selected Proposer(s) based on the recommendations of the proposal evaluation committee. To qualify for the final evaluation, a Proposer must have been deemed responsive as a result of the criteria set forth under “Proposer Responsiveness,” found just below. B. PROPOSER RESPONSIVENESS 6.4 All responses are evaluated for Level-One and Level-Two Responsiveness. If a response does not substantially conform to substantially all of the terms and conditions in the solicitation, or if it requires unreasonable exceptions, it may be considered nonresponsive. 6.5 All proposals must contain suitable responses to the questions in the proposal forms. The following requirements must be satisfied in order to meet Level-One Responsiveness, which is typically ascertained on the proposal opening date. If these standards are not met, your response may be disqualified as nonresponsive. 6.6 Level-One Responsiveness means that the response 6.6.1 is received before the deadline for submission or it will be returned unopened; 6.6.2 is properly addressed and identified as a sealed proposal with a specific RFP number and an opening date and time; 6.6.3 contains a pricing document (with apparent discounts) and all other forms fully completed, even if “not applicable” is the answer; 6.6.4 includes the original (hard copy) completed, dated, and signed RFP forms C, D, and F. In addition, the response must include the hard-copy signed signature page only from RFP Forms A and P and, if applicable, all signed addenda that have been issued in relation to this RFP; 6.6.5 contains an electronic (CD, flash drive, or other suitable) copy of the entire response; and 6.7 Level-Two Responsiveness (including whether the response is within the RFP’s scope) is determined while evaluating the remaining items listed under Proposal Evaluation Criteria below. These items are not arranged in order of importance. Each item draws from multiple questions, and a Proposer’s responses may affect scoring in multiple evaluation criteria. For example, the answers to Industry-Specific Questions may 20 help determine scoring relative to a Proposer’s marketplace success, ability to sell and service nationwide, and financial strength. Any questions not answered without an explanation will likely result in a loss of points and may lead to a nonaward if the proposal evaluation committee cannot effectively review your response. C. PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA 6.8 Forms A and P include a series of questions that address the following categories: 6.8.1 Company Information and Financial Strength 6.8.2 Industry Requirements and Marketplace Success 6.8.3 Ability to Sell and Deliver Service Nationwide 6.8.4 Marketing Plan 6.8.5 Other Cooperative Procurement Contracts 6.8.6 Value-Added Attributes 6.8.7 Payment Terms and Financing Options 6.8.8 Warranty 6.8.9 Equipment/Products/Services 6.8.10 Pricing and Delivery 6.8.11 Industry-Specific Questions 6.9 [This section is intentionally blank.] D. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 6.10 In evaluating RFP responses, Sourcewell has no obligation to consider information that is not provided in the Proposer’s response. Sourcewell may, however, consider additional information outside the Proposer’s response. This research may include such sources as the Proposer’s website, industry publications, listed references, and user interviews. 6.11 Sourcewell may organize RFP responses into separate classes or subcategories, depending on the range of responses. For example, Sourcewell might receive numerous submissions for “Widgets and Related Products and Services.” Sourcewell may organize these responses into subcategories, such as manufacturers of fully operational Widgets, manufacturers of component parts for Widgets, and providers of parts and service for Widgets. Sourcewell reserves the right to award Proposers in some or all of such subcategories without regard to the evaluation score given to Proposers in another subcategory. This specifically allows Sourcewell to award Vendors that might not have, for instance, the breadth of products of Proposers in another subcategory, but that nonetheless meet a substantial and articulated need of Sourcewell Members. 6.12 [This section is intentionally blank.] 6.13 Sourcewell reserves the right to request and test equipment/products and related services and to seek clarification from Proposers. Before the Contract award, the Proposer must furnish the requested information within three (3) days (or within another agreed-to time frame) or provide an explanation for the delay along with a requested time frame for providing the requested information. Proposers must make reasonable efforts to supply test products promptly. All Proposer products remain the property of the Proposer, and Sourcewell will return such products after the evaluation process. Sourcewell may make provisional contract awards, subject to a Proposer’s proper response to a request for information or products. 21 6.14 A Proposer’s past performance under previously awarded contracts to schools, governmental agencies, and not-for-profit entities is relevant in evaluating a Proposer’s current response. Past performance includes the Proposer’s record of conforming to published specifications and to standards of good workmanship, as well as the Proposer’s history for reasonable and cooperative behavior and for commitment to Member satisfaction. Incumbency as an awarded Vendor does not, by itself, merit positive consideration for a future Contract award. 6.15 Sourcewell reserves the right to reject any or all proposals. E. COST COMPARISON 6.16 Sourcewell may use a variety of evaluation methods, including cost comparisons of specific products. Sourcewell reserves the right to use this process when the proposal evaluation committee determines that this will help to make a final determination. 6.17 This direct cost comparison process will award points for being low to high Proposer for each cost evaluation item selected. A “Market Basket” of identical (or substantially similar) equipment/products and related services may be selected by the proposal evaluation committee, and the unit cost will be used as a basis for determining the point value. Sourcewell will select the “Market Basket” from all appropriate product categories as determined by Sourcewell. F. MARKETING PLAN 6.18 A Proposer’s marketing plan is a critical component of the RFP response. An awarded Vendor’s sales force will likely be the primary source of communication with Sourcewell Members and will directly affect the contract’s success. Marketing success depends on communicating the contract’s value, knowing the contract thoroughly, and communicating the proper use of contracted products and services to the end user. Much of the success and sales reward is a direct result of the commitment to the contract by the awarded Vendor’s sales teams. Sourcewell reserves the right to deem a Proposer Level-Two nonresponsive or not to award a contract based on an unacceptable or incomplete marketing plan. 6.19 Sourcewell marketing expectations include the following components. 6.19.1 An awarded Vendor must demonstrate the ability to deploy a national sales force or dealer network. The best RFP responses demonstrate the ability to sell, deliver, and service products through acceptable distribution channels to Sourcewell members in all 50 states. Proposers’ responses should fully demonstrate their sales and service capabilities, should outline their national sales force network (both numerically geographically), and should describe their method of distribution of the offered products and related services. Service may be independent of the product sales pricing, but Sourcewell encourages related services to be a part of Proposers’ response. Despite its preference for awarding contracts to Vendors that demonstrate nationwide sales and service, Sourcewell reserves the right to award contracts that meet specific Member needs locally or regionally. 6.19.2 Proposers are invited to demonstrate their ability to successfully market, promote, and communicate the benefits of an Sourcewell contract to current and potential Members nationwide. Sourcewell desires a marketing plan that communicates the value of the contract to as many Members as possible. 6.19.3 Proposers are expected to be receptive to Sourcewell trainings. Awarded Vendors must provide an appropriate training venue for both management and the sales force. Sourcewell commits to providing training on all aspects of communicating the value of the awarded contract, including the authority of Sourcewell to offer the contract to its Members, the value and utility the contract delivers to Sourcewell Members, the scope of Sourcewell Membership, the authority of 22 Members to use Sourcewell procurement contracts, the preferred marketing and sales methods, and the successful use of specific business sector strategies. 6.19.4 Awarded Vendors are expected to demonstrate a commitment to fully embrace the Sourcewell contract. Proposers should identify both the appropriate levels of sales management and sales force that will need to understand the value of the Sourcewell contract, as well as the internal procedures needed to deliver the appropriate messaging to Sourcewell Members. Sourcewell will provide a general schedule and a variety of methods describing when and how those individuals should be trained. 6.19.5 Proposers should outline their proposed involvement in promoting a Sourcewell contract through applicable industry trade show exhibits and related customer meetings. Proposers are encouraged to consider participation with Sourcewell at Sourcewell-endorsed national trade shows. 6.19.6 Proposers must exhibit the willingness and ability to actively market and develop contract- specific marketing materials including the following items. 6.19.6.1 Complete Marketing Plan. Proposers must submit a marketing plan outlining how they will launch the Sourcewell contract to current and potential Sourcewell Members. Sourcewell requires awarded Vendors to embrace and actively promote the contract in cooperation with Sourcewell. 6.19.6.2 Printed Marketing Materials. Awarded Vendors will produce and maintain full color print advertisements in camera-ready electronic format, including company logos and contact information to be used in the Sourcewell directory and other approved marketing publications. 6.19.6.3 Contract announcements and advertisements. Proposers should outline in the marketing plan their anticipated contract announcements, advertisements in industry periodicals, and other direct or indirect marketing activities promoting the awarded Sourcewell contract. 6.19.6.4 Proposer’s Website. Proposers should identify how an awarded Contract will be displayed and linked on the Proposer’s website. An online shopping experience for Sourcewell Members is desired whenever possible. 6.19.7 A Sourcewell Vendor contract launch will be scheduled during a reasonable time frame after the award and held at the Sourcewell office in Staples, MN unless the Vendor and Sourcewell agree to a different location. 6.20 Proposer shall identify their commitment to develop a sales/communication process to facilitate Sourcewell membership and establish status of current and potential agencies/members. Proposer should further express their commitment to capturing sufficient member information as is deemed necessary by Sourcewell. G. CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE 6.21 Proposers must provide evidence of liability insurance coverage identified below in the form of a Certificate of Insurance (COI) or an ACORD binder form with their proposal. Upon an award issued under this RFP and before the execution of any commerce relating to such award, the awarded Vendor must provide verification, in the form of a Certificate of Insurance, identifying the coverage required below and identifying Sourcewell as a “Certificate Holder.” The Vendor must maintain such insurance coverage at its own expense throughout the term of any contract resulting from this solicitation. 23 6.22 Any exceptions or assumptions to the insurance requirements must be identified on Form C of this RFP. Exceptions and assumptions will be considered as part of the evaluation process. Any exceptions or assumptions that Proposers submit must be specific. If a Proposer does not include specific exceptions or assumptions when submitting the proposal, Sourcewell will typically not consider any additional exceptions or assumptions during the evaluation process. Upon contract award, the awarded Vendor must provide the Certificate of Insurance identifying the coverage as specified. 6.23 Insurance Liability Limits. The awarded Vendor must maintain, for the duration of its contract, $1.5 million in general liability insurance coverage or general liability insurance in conjunction with an umbrella for a total combined coverage of $1.5 million. Work on the Contract will not begin until after the awarded Vendor has submitted acceptable evidence of the required insurance coverage. Failure to maintain any required insurance coverage or an acceptable alternative method of insurance will be deemed a breach of contract. 6.23.1 Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance. An awarded Vendor must provide coverage with limits of liability not less than those stated below. An excess liability policy or umbrella liability policy may be used to meet the minimum liability requirements provided that the coverage is written on a “following form” basis. 6.23.1.1 Commercial General Liability—Occurrence Form Policy shall include bodily injury, property damage and broad form contractual liability and XCU coverage. 6.23.1.2 Each Occurrence $1,500,000 6.24 Insurance Requirements: The limits listed in this RFP are minimum requirements for this Contract and in no way limit any indemnity covenants contained in this Contract. Sourcewell does not warrant that the minimum limits contained herein are sufficient to protect the Vendor from liabilities that might arise out of the performance of the work under this Contract by the Vendor, its agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors, and the Vendor is free to purchase additional insurance as may be determined necessary. 6.25 Acceptability of Insurers: Insurance is to be placed with insurers duly licensed or authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota and with an “A.M. Best” rating of not less than A- VII. Sourcewell does not warrant that the above required minimum insurer rating is sufficient to protect the Vendor from potential insurer solvency. 6.26 Subcontractors: Vendors’ certificate(s) must include all subcontractors as additional insureds under its policies, or the Vendor must furnish to Sourcewell separate certificates for each subcontractor. All coverage for subcontractors are be subject to the minimum requirements identified above. H. ORDER PROCESS AND/OR FUNDS FLOW 6.27 Sourcewell Members typically issue a purchase order directly to a Vendor under a Contract resulting from this RFP. Alternatively, a separate contract may be created to facilitate acquiring products or services offered in response to this RFP. Nothing in this Contract restricts the Member and Vendor from agreeing to add terms or conditions to a purchase order or a separate contract provided that such terms or conditions must not be less favorable to Sourcewell’s Members. 6.28 [This section is intentionally blank.] I. ADMINISTRATIVE FEES 6.29 Vendors will pay to Sourcewell an administrative fee in exchange for Sourcewell facilitating this Contract with its current and potential Members. Sourcewell may grant a conditional contract award to a 24 Proposer if the proposed administrative fee is unclear, inadequate, or unduly burdensome for Sourcewell to administer. Sales under this Contract should not be processed until the parties resolve the administrative fee issue. 6.29.1 The administrative fee is typically calculated as a percentage of the dollar volume of all products and services by Sourcewell Members under this Contract, including anything represented to Sourcewell Members as falling under this Contract. 6.29.2 The administrative fee is included in, and not added to, the pricing included in Proposer’s response to the RFP. Awarded Vendors must not charge Sourcewell Members more that permitted in the then current price list in order to offset the administrative fee. 6.29.3 The administrative fee is designed to cover the costs of Sourcewell’s involvement in contract management, facilitating marketing efforts, Vendor training, and any order processing tasks relating to the Contract. Administrative fees may also be used for other purposes as allowed by Minnesota law. 6.29.4 The typical administrative fee under this Contract is two percent (2%). While Sourcewell does not dictate the particular fee percentage, we require that the Proposer articulate a specific fee in its response. For example, merely stating that “we agree to pay an administrative fee” is considered nonresponsive. Sourcewell acknowledges that the administrative fee percentage may differ between vendors, industries, and responses. 6.29.5 Sourcewell awarded Vendors are responsible for paying the administrative fee at least quarterly and for generating all related reporting. Vendors agree to cooperate with Sourcewell in auditing these reports to ensure that the administrative fee is paid on all items purchased under the Contract. 6.29.6 [This section is intentionally blank.] 6.30 through 6.32 [This section is intentionally blank.] J. VALUE–ADDED ATTRIBUTES 6.33 Desirability of Value-Added Attributes: Value-added attributes in an RFP response will be given positive consideration in Sourcewell’s evaluation process. Such attributes may increase the benefit of a product or service by improving functionality, performance, maintenance, manufacturing, delivery, energy efficiency, ordering, or other items while remaining within the scope of this RFP. 6.34 Women and Minority Business Enterprise (WMBE), Small Business, and Other Favored Businesses: Some Sourcewell Members give formal preference to certain types of vendors or contractors. Proposers should document WMBE (or other) status for both their organization and for any affiliates (e.g., supplier networks) involved in fulfilling the terms of this RFP. The ability of a Proposer to provide preferred business entity “credits” to Sourcewell and Sourcewell Members under a Contract will be evaluated positively by Sourcewell and reflected in the “value added” area of the evaluation. 6.35 Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Opportunities: Many Sourcewell Members consider the environmental impact of the products and services they purchase. “Green” characteristics demonstrated by Proposers will be evaluated positively by Sourcewell and reflected in the “value added” area of the evaluation. Please identify any green characteristics of any offering in your proposal and identify the sanctioning body determining that characteristic. Where appropriate, please indicate which products have been certified as green and by which certifying agency. 6.36 Online Requisitioning Systems: When applicable, online requisitioning systems will be viewed as a value-added characteristic. Proposers should demonstrate how their system makes online ordering easier 25 for Sourcewell Members, including how Members could integrate their current e-Procurement or enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems into the Proposer’s ordering process. 6.37 Financing: The ability of the Proposer to provide financing solutions to Members for the products and services being proposed will be viewed as a value-added attribute. 6.38 Technology: Technological advances that appreciably improve the proposed products or services will be considered value-added attributes. K. WAIVER OF FORMALITIES 6.39 Sourcewell reserves the right to waive minor formalities (or to accept minor irregularities) in any proposal, when it determines that considering the proposal may be in the best interest of its Members. 7 POST-AWARD OPERATING ISSUES A. SUBSEQUENT AGREEMENTS 7.1 Purchase Order. Purchase orders for products and services may be executed between Sourcewell Members and the awarded Vendor (or Vendor’s sub-contractors) under this Contract. Sourcewell Members and Vendors must indicate on the face of such purchase orders that “This purchase order is issued under Sourcewell contract #XXXXXX” (insert the relevant contract number). Purchase order flow and procedure will be developed jointly between Sourcewell and an awarded Vendor after an award is made. 7.2 Governing Law. Purchase orders must be construed in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of a competent jurisdiction with respect to the Member. (See also Section 8.5 of this RFP.) All provisions required by law to be included in the purchase order should be read and enforced as if they were included. If through mistake or otherwise any such provision is not included, then upon application of either party the Contract shall be physically amended to make such inclusion or correction. The venue for any litigation arising out of disputes related to purchase order will be a court of competent jurisdiction with respect to the Member. 7.3 Additional Terms and Conditions. Additional terms and conditions to a purchase order may be proposed by Sourcewell, Sourcewell Members, or Vendors. Acceptance of these additional terms and conditions is optional to all parties to the purchase order. One purpose of these additional terms and conditions is to address job- or industry-specific requirements of law such as prevailing wage legislation. Additional terms and conditions may also include specific local policy requirements and standard business practices of the issuing Member or the Vendor. Such additional terms and conditions are not considered valid to the extent that they interfere with the general purpose, intent, or currently established terms and conditions contain in this RFP document. For example, a Vendor and Member may agree to add a “net 30” payment requirement to the purchase order instead of applying a “net 10” requirement. But the added terms and conditions must not be less favorable to the Member unless Sourcewell, the Member, and the Vendor agree to a Contract amendment or similar modification. 7.4 Specialized Service Requirements. In the event that the Sourcewell Member desires service requirements or specialized performance requirements (such as e-commerce specifications, specialized delivery requirements, or other specifications and requirements) not addressed in the Contract resulting from this RFP, the Sourcewell Member and the Vendor may enter into a separate, standalone agreement, apart from a Contract resulting from this RFP. Any proposed service requirements or specialized performance requirements require pre-approval by the Vendor. Any separate agreement developed to address these specialized service or performance requirements is exclusively between the Sourcewell Member and Vendor. Sourcewell, its agents, and employees shall not be made a party to any claim for breach of such agreement. Product sourcing is not considered a service. Sourcewell Members will need to conduct procurements for any specialized services not identified as a part of or within the scope of the awarded Contract. 26 7.5 Performance Bond. At the request of the Member, a Vendor will provide all performance bonds typically and customarily required in their industry. These bonds will be issued pursuant to the requirements of purchase orders for products and services. If a purchase order is cancelled for lack of a required performance bond by the member agency, Sourcewell recommends that the current pending purchase order be canceled. Each Member has the final decision on purchase order continuation. Any performance bonding required by the Member, the Member’s state laws, or by local policy is to be mutually agreed upon and secured between the Vendor and the Member. 7.6 Asset Management Contracts: Asset Management-type Contracts can be initiated under a Contract resulting from this RFP at any time during the term of this Contract. Such a contract could involve, for example, picking up, storing, repairing, inventorying, salvaging, and delivery products falling within the scope of this Contract. The intention in using Asset Management Contracts is to promote the long-term efficiency of Sourcewell’s contracts by (among other things) extending the use and re-use of products. Asset Management Contracts cannot be created under this Contract unless they are executed within the authorized term of a Contract resulting from this RFP. The actual term of the Asset Management Contract may, however, extend beyond the expiration date of this Contract. B. SOURCEWELL MEMBER SIGN-UP PROCEDURE 7.7 Awarded Vendors are responsible for familiarizing their sales and service forces with the various forms of Sourcewell membership documentation and will encourage and assist potential Members in establishing membership with Sourcewell. Sourcewell membership is available at no cost, obligation, or liability to the Member or the Vendor. C. REPORTING OF SALES ACTIVITY 7.8 Awarded Vendors must report at least quarterly the total gross dollar volume of all products and services purchased by Sourcewell Members as it applies to this RFP and Contract. This report must include the name and address of the purchasing agency, Member number, amount of purchase, and a description of the items purchased. 7.8.1 Zero sales reports: Awarded Vendors must provide a quarterly Contract sales report regardless of the amount of sales. D. AUDITS 7.9 Sourcewell relies substantially on the reasonable auditing efforts of both Members and awarded Vendors to ensure that Members are obtaining the products, services, pricing, and other benefits under all Sourcewell contracts. Nonetheless, the Vendor must retain and make available to Sourcewell all order and invoicing documentation related to purchases that Members make from the Vendor under the awarded Contract. Sourcewell must not request such information more than once per calendar year, and Sourcewell must make such requests in writing with at least fourteen (14) days’ notice. Sourcewell may employ an independent auditor at its own expense or conduct an audit on its own. In either event, the Vendor agrees to cooperate fully with Sourcewell or its agents in order to ensure compliance with this Contract. E. HUB PARTNER 7.10 Hub Partner: Sourcewell Members may request special services through a “Hub Partner” for the purpose of complying with a law, regulation, or rule that an Sourcewell Member deems to apply in its jurisdiction. Hub Partners may bring value to the proposed transactions through consultancy, through qualifying for disadvantaged business entity credits, or through other means. 7.11 Hub Partner Fees: Sourcewell Members are responsible for any transaction fees, costs, or expenses that arise under this Contract for special service provided by the Hub Partner. The fees, costs, or expenses levied by the Hub Vendor must be clearly itemized in the transaction documentation. To the extent that the 27 Vendor stands in the chain of title during a transaction resulting from this RFP, the documentation must clearly indicate that the transaction is “Executed for the Benefit of [Sourcewell Member name].” F. TRADE-INS 7.12 The value in US Dollars for Trade-ins will be negotiated between Sourcewell or an Sourcewell Member, and an Awarded Vendor. That identified “Trade-In” value shall be viewed as a down payment and credited in full against the Sourcewell purchase price identified in a purchase order issued pursuant to any Awarded Sourcewell procurement contract. The full value of the trade-in will be consideration. G. OUT OF STOCK NOTIFICATION 7.13 The Vendor must immediately notify Sourcewell Members when they order an out-of-stock item. The Vendor must also tell the Member when the item will be available and whether there are equivalent substitutes. The Member must have the option of accepting the suggested substitute or canceling the item from the order. Under no circumstance may the Vendor make unauthorized substitutions. Unfilled or substituted items must be indicated on the packing list. H. CONTRACT TERMINATION FOR CAUSE AND WITHOUT CAUSE 7.14 Sourcewell reserves the right to cancel all or any part of this Contract if the Vendor fails to fulfill any material obligation, term, or condition as described in the following procedure. Before any such termination for cause, Sourcewell will provide written notice to the Vendor, an opportunity to respond, and a reasonable opportunity to cure the breach. The following are some examples of material breaches. 7.14.1 The Vendor provides products or services that do not meet reasonable quality standards and that are not remedied under the warranty; 7.14.2 The Vendor fails to ship the products or to provide the services within a reasonable amount of time; 7.14.3 Sourcewell reasonably believes that the Vendor will not or cannot perform to the requirements or expectations of the Contract, Sourcewell issues a request for assurance, and the Vendor fails to respond; 7.14.4 The Vendor fails to fulfill any of the material terms and conditions of the Contract; 7.14.5 The Vendor fails to follow the established procedure for purchase orders, invoices, or receipt of funds as established by Sourcewell and the Vendor; 7.14.6 The Vendor fails to properly report quarterly sales; 7.14.7 The Vendor fails to actively market this Contract within the guidelines provided in this RFP and defined in the Sourcewell contract launch. 7.15 Upon receipt of the written notice of breach, the Vendor will have ten (10) business days to provide a satisfactory response to Sourcewell. If the Vendor fails to reasonably address all issues in the written notice, Sourcewell may terminate the Contract immediately. If Sourcewell allows the Vendor more time to remedy the breach, such forbearance does not limit Sourcewell’s authority to immediately terminate the Contract for continued breaches for which notice was given to the Vendor. Termination of the Contract for cause does not relieve either party of the financial, product, or service obligations incurred before the termination. 7.16 Sourcewell may terminate the Contract if the Vendor files for bankruptcy protection or is acquired by an independent third party. The Vendor must disclose to Sourcewell any litigation, bankruptcy, or 28 suspensions/disbarments that occur during the Contract period. Failure to disclose such information authorizes Sourcewell to immediately terminate the Contract. 7.17 Sourcewell may terminate the Contract without cause by giving the Vendor sixty (60) days’ written notice of termination. Termination of the Contract without cause does not relieve either party of the financial, product, or service obligations incurred before the termination. 7.18 Sourcewell may immediately terminate any Contract without further obligation if any Sourcewell employee significantly involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting, or creating the Contract on behalf of Sourcewell has colluded with any Proposer for personal gain. Sourcewell may also immediately cancel a Contract if it finds that gratuities, in the form of entertainment, gifts or otherwise, were offered or given by the Vendor or any agent or representative of the Vendor, to any employee of Sourcewell. Such terminations are effective upon written notice from Sourcewell or at a later date designated in the notice. Termination of the Contract does not relieve either party of the financial, product, or service obligations incurred before the termination. 8 GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 8. ADVERTISING A CONTRACT RESULTING FROM THIS RFP 8.1 Proposer/Vendor must not advertise or publish information concerning this Contract before the award is announced by Sourcewell. Once the award is made, a Vendor is expected to advertise the awarded Contract to both current and potential Sourcewell Members. B. APPLICABLE LAW 8.2 [This section is intentionally blank.] 8.3 Sourcewell Compliance with Minnesota Procurement Law: Sourcewell has designed its procurement process to comply with best practices in the State of Minnesota. Sourcewell’s solicitation methods are also created to comply with many of the various requirements that our Members must satisfy in their own procurement processes. But these requirements may differ considerably and may change from time to time. So each Sourcewell Member must make its own determination whether Sourcewell’s solicitation process satisfies the procurement rules in the Member’s jurisdiction. 8.4 Governing law with respect to delivery and acceptance: All applicable portions of the Minnesota Uniform Commercial Code, all other applicable Minnesota laws, and the applicable laws and rules of delivery and inspection of the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) laws will govern Sourcewell contracts resulting from this solicitation. 8.5 Jurisdiction: Any claims that arise against Sourcewell pertaining to this RFP, and any resulting contract that develops between Sourcewell and any other party, must be brought only in courts in Todd County in the State of Minnesota unless otherwise agreed to. 8.5.1 Purchase orders or other agreements created pursuant to a contract resulting from this solicitation must be construed in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of the issuing Member. Any claim arising from such a purchase order or agreement must be filed and venued in a court of competent jurisdiction of the Member unless otherwise agreed to. 8.6 through 8.7 [This section is intentionally blank.] 8.8 Indemnification: Each party is responsible for its own acts and is not responsible for the acts of the other party and the results thereof. Sourcewell’s liability is governed by the Minnesota Tort Claims Act (Minn. Stat. §3.736) and other applicable law. 29 8.9 Prevailing wage: The Vendor must comply with applicable prevailing wage legislation in effect in the jurisdiction of the Sourcewell Member. The Vendor must monitor the prevailing wage rates as established by the appropriate federal governmental entity during the term of this Contract and adjust wage rates accordingly. 8.10 Patent and copyright infringement: The Vendor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Sourcewell and Sourcewell Members against any and all suits, claims, judgments, and costs instituted or recovered against the Vendor, Sourcewell, or Sourcewell Members by any person on account of the use or sale of any articles by Sourcewell or Sourcewell Members if the Vendor supplied such articles in violation of applicable patent or copyright laws. C. ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT 8.11 No right or interest in this Contract may be assigned or transferred by the Vendor without prior written permission by Sourcewell. No delegation of any duty of the Vendor under this Contract may be made without prior written permission of Sourcewell. Sourcewell will notify Members by posting approved assignments on the Sourcewell website (www.sourcewell-mn.gov). 8.12 If the original Vendor sells or transfers all assets or the entire portion of the assets used to perform this Contract, a successor-in-interest must perform all obligations under this Contract. Sourcewell reserves the right to reject the acquiring entity as a Vendor. A change of name agreement will not change the contractual obligations of the Vendor. D. LIST OF PROPOSERS 8.13 Sourcewell will not maintain a list of interested proposers, nor will it automatically send RFPs to them. All interested proposers must request the RFP as a result of Sourcewell’s national solicitation advertisements. Because of the wide scope of the potential Members and qualified national suppliers, Sourcewell has determined this to be the best method of fairly soliciting proposals. E. CAPTIONS, HEADINGS, AND ILLUSTRATIONS 8.14 The captions, illustrations, headings, and subheadings in this RFP are for convenience and ease of understanding and in no way define or limit the scope or intent of this request. F. DATA PRACTICES 8.15 All materials submitted in response to this RFP become Sourcewell’s property and become public records (under Minn. Stat. §13.591) after the evaluation process is completed. If the Proposer submits information in response to this RFP that it requests to be classified as nonpublic information (as defined by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. §13.37), the Proposer must meet the following requirements. 8.15.1 The Proposer must make the request within thirty (30) days of the award/nonaward notification, and include the appropriate statutory justification. Pricing, marketing plans, and financial information is generally not redactable. The Sourcewell Legal Department will review the request to determine whether the information can be withheld or redacted. If Sourcewell determines that it must disclose the information upon a proper request for such information, Sourcewell will inform the Proposer of such determination. 8.15.2 The Proposer must defend any action seeking release of the materials that it believes to be nonpublic information, and it must indemnify and hold harmless Sourcewell, its agents, and employees, from any judgments or damages awarded against Sourcewell in favor of the party requesting the materials, and any and all costs connected with that defense. This indemnification survives the term of any contract awarded under this RFP. In submitting a response to this RFP, 30 the Proposer agrees that this indemnification survives as long as Sourcewell possesses the confidential information. 8.16 [This section is intentionally blank.] G. ENTIRE AGREEMENT 8.17 This Contract, as defined herein, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties to this Contract. A Contract resulting from this RFP is formed when the vendor, Sourcewell Executive Director and Chief Procurement Officer approves and signs the applicable Contract Award & Acceptance document (Form E). H. FORCE MAJEURE 8.18 Except for payments of sums due, neither party is liable to the other nor deemed in default under this Contract if and to the extent that such party’s performance of this Contract is prevented due to force majeure. The term “force majeure” means an occurrence that is beyond the control of the party affected and occurs without its fault or negligence including, but not limited to, the following: acts of God, acts of the public enemy, war, riots, strikes, mobilization, labor disputes, civil disorders, fire, flood, snow, earthquakes, tornadoes or violent wind, tsunamis, wind shears, squalls, Chinooks, blizzards, hail storms, volcanic eruptions, meteor strikes, famine, sink holes, avalanches, lockouts, injunctions-intervention-acts, terrorist events or failures or refusals to act by government authority and/or other similar occurrences where such party is unable to prevent by exercising reasonable diligence. The force majeure is deemed to commence when the party declaring force majeure notifies the other party of the existence of the force majeure and is deemed to continue as long as the results or effects of the force majeure prevent the party from resuming performance in accordance with a Contract resulting from this RFP. Force majeure does not include late deliveries of products and services caused by congestion at a manufacturer’s plant or elsewhere, an oversold condition of the market, inefficiencies, or other similar occurrences. If either party is delayed at any time by force majeure, then the delayed party must (if possible) notify the other party of such delay within forty-eight (48) hours. 8.19 through 8.20 [These sections are intentionally blank.] I. LICENSES 8.21 The Vendor must maintain a valid status on all required federal, state, and local licenses, bonds, and permits required for the operation of the business that the Vendor conducts with Sourcewell and Sourcewell Members. 8.22 All responding Proposers must be licensed (where required) and must have the authority to sell and distribute the offered products and services to Sourcewell and Sourcewell Members. Documentation of the required licenses and authorities, if applicable, should be included in the Proposer’s response to this RFP. J. MATERIAL SUPPLIERS AND SUB-CONTRACTORS 8.23 The awarded Vendor must supply the names and addresses of sourcing suppliers and sub-contractors as a part of the purchase order when requested by Sourcewell or a Sourcewell Member. K. NON-WAIVER OF RIGHTS 8.24 No failure of either party to exercise any power given to it hereunder, nor a failure to insist upon strict compliance by the other party with its obligations hereunder, nor a custom or practice of the parties at variance with the terms hereof, nor any payment under a Contract resulting from this RFP constitutes a waiver of either party’s right to demand exact compliance with the terms hereof. Failure by Sourcewell to take action or to assert any right hereunder does not constitute a waiver of such right. 31 L. PROTESTS OF AWARDS MADE 8.25 Any protests must be filed with Sourcewell’s Executive Director and must be resolved in accordance with appropriate Minnesota rules. Protests will only be accepted from Proposers. A protest of an award or nonaward must be filed in writing with Sourcewell within ten (10) calendar days after the public notice or announcement of the award or nonaward. A protest must include the following items. 8.25.1 The name, address, and telephone number of the protester; 8.25.2 The original signature of the protester or its representative (you must document the authority of the representative); 8.25.3 Identification of the solicitation by RFP number; 8.25.4 Identification of the statute or procedure that is alleged to have been violated; 8.25.5 A precise statement of the relevant facts; 8.25.6 Identification of the issues to be resolved; 8.25.7 The aggrieved party’s argument and supporting documentation; 8.25.8 The aggrieved party’s statement of potential financial damages; and 8.25.9 A protest bond in the name of Sourcewell and in the amount of 10% of the aggrieved party’s statement of potential financial damages. M. SUSPENSION OR DISBARMENT STATUS 8.26 If within the past five (5) years, any firm, business, person or Proposer responding to a Sourcewell solicitation has been lawfully terminated, suspended, or precluded from participating in any public procurement activity with a federal, state, or local government or education agency, the Proposer must include a letter with its response setting forth the name and address of the public procurement unit, the effective date of the suspension or debarment, the duration of the suspension or debarment, and the relevant circumstances relating to the suspension or debarment. Any failure to supply such a letter or to disclose pertinent information may result in the termination of a Contract. By signing the proposal affidavit, the Proposer certifies that no current suspension or debarment exists. N. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND IMMIGRATION STATUS CERTIFICATION 8.27 An Affirmative Action Plan, Certificate of Affirmative Action, or other documentation regarding Affirmative Action may be required by Sourcewell or Sourcewell Members relating to a transaction from this RFP. Vendors must comply with any such requirements or requests. 8.28 Immigration Status Certification may be required by Sourcewell or Sourcewell Members relating to a transaction from this RFP. Vendors must comply with any such requirements or requests. O. SEVERABILITY 8.29 In the event that any of the terms of a Contract resulting from this RFP are in conflict with any rule, law, or statutory provision, or are otherwise unenforceable under the laws or regulations of any government or subdivision thereof, such terms will be deemed stricken from the Contract, but such invalidity or unenforceability shall not invalidate any of the other terms of an awarded Contract resulting from this RFP. P. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES 32 8.30 No Contract resulting from this RFP may be considered a contract of employment. The relationship between Sourcewell and an awarded Vendor is one of independent contractors, each free to exercise judgment and discretion with regard to the conduct of their respective businesses. The parties neither intend the proposed Contract to create, nor is to be construed as creating, a partnership, joint venture, master- servant, principal-agent, or any other, relationship. Except as provided elsewhere in this RFP, neither party may be held liable for acts of omission or commission of the other party and neither party is authorized or has the power to obligate the other party by contract, agreement, warranty, representation, or otherwise in any manner whatsoever except as may be expressly provided herein. Q. PROVISIONS FOR NON-FEDERAL ENTITY PROCUREMENTS UNDER FEDERAL AWARDS OR OTHER AWARDS; AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROVISIONS 8.31 Procurements by Sourcewell or Sourcewell Members utilizing funds under a federal grant or contract may be subject to specific federal laws, regulations, and requirements in addition to those under state and local laws. Applicable law may include, but is not limited to, the procurement standards of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, 2 CFR Part 200 (also referred to as the “Uniform Guidance” or “EDGAR”). The terms included in this section express Proposers willingness and ability to comply with certain requirements which may be applicable to specific Sourcewell Member purchases using federal grant or contract dollars. Sourcewell Members may also require Proposers to enter into ancillary agreements, in addition to the Sourcewell contract’s general terms and conditions, to address the Member’s specific contractual needs, including contract requirements for a procurement using federal grants or contracts. Sourcewell reserves the right at any time within a contract term to require an awarded Vendor to reaffirm or resubmit proper documentation relating to these requirements. The numbering and identification contained within this section is only for reference purposes and does not identify any actual Federal designation or location of the rule. Rules are located in 2 CFR Part 200. 8.32 Contracts for more than the simplified acquisition threshold currently set at $150,000, which is the inflation adjusted amount determined by the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulations Council (Councils) as authorized by 41 U.S.C. 1908, must address administrative, contractual, or legal remedies in instances where contractors violate or breach contract terms, and provide for such sanctions and penalties as appropriate. Sourcewell reserves all rights and privileges under the applicable laws and regulations with respect to this procurement process in the event of breach of contract by either party. 8.33 Contracts in excess of $10,000 must address termination for cause and for convenience by the non- Federal entity including the manner by which it will be effected and the basis for settlement. Sourcewell reserves the right to terminate any agreement resulting from this procurement process pursuant to Sourcewell RFP sections 7.13 and 7.17. Prior to any termination for cause, Sourcewell will provide written notice to the Proposer, opportunity to respond and opportunity to cure. Sourcewell reserves the right to terminate any agreement resulting from this procurement process without cause with a required 60-day written notice of termination. Termination of Contract shall not relieve either party of financial, product or service obligations incurred or accrued prior to termination. 8.34 Equal Employment Opportunity. Except as otherwise provided under 41 CFR Part 60, all contracts that meet the definition of “federally assisted construction contract” in 41 CFR Part 60-1.3 must include the equal opportunity clause provided under 41 CFR 60-1.4(b), in accordance with Executive Order 11246, “Equal Employment Opportunity” (30 FR 12319, 12935, 3 CFR Part, 1964-1965 Comp., p. 339), as amended by Executive Order 11375, “Amending Executive Order 11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity,” and implementing regulations at 41 CFR part 60, “Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor.” This provision is hereby incorporated by reference into all applicable contracts. 33 The equal opportunity clause is incorporated by reference herein. 8.35 Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 3141-3148). When required by Federal program legislation, all prime construction contracts in excess of $2,000 awarded by non-Federal entities must include a provision for compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 3141-3144, and 3146-3148) as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR Part 5, “Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Covering Federally Financed and Assisted Construction”). In accordance with the statute, contractors must be required to pay wages to laborers and mechanics at a rate not less than the prevailing wages specified in a wage determination made by the Secretary of Labor. In addition, contractors must be required to pay wages not less than once a week. The non-Federal entity must place a copy of the current prevailing wage determination issued by the Department of Labor in each solicitation. The decision to award a contract or subcontract must be conditioned upon the acceptance of the wage determination. The non-Federal entity must report all suspected or reported violations to the Federal awarding agency. The contracts must also include a provision for compliance with the Copeland “Anti-Kickback” Act (40 U.S.C. 3145), as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR Part 3, “Contractors and Subcontractors on Public Building or Public Work Financed in Whole or in Part by Loans or Grants from the United States”). The Act provides that each contractor or subrecipient must be prohibited from inducing, by any means, any person employed in the construction, completion, or repair of public work, to give up any part of the compensation to which he or she is otherwise entitled. The non-Federal entity must report all suspected or reported violations to the Federal awarding agency. Proposer shall be in compliance with all applicable Davis-Bacon Act provisions. 8.36 Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 3701-3708). Where applicable, all contracts awarded by the non-Federal entity in excess of $100,000 that involve the employment of mechanics or laborers must include a provision for compliance with 40 U.S.C. 3702 and 3704, as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR Part 5). Under 40 U.S.C. 3702 of the Act, each contractor must be required to compute the wages of every mechanic and laborer on the basis of a standard work week of 40 hours. Work in excess of the standard work week is permissible provided that the worker is compensated at a rate of not less than one and a half times the basic rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in the work week. The requirements of 40 U.S.C. 3704 are applicable to construction work and provide that no laborer or mechanic must be required to work in surroundings or under working conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous or dangerous. These requirements do not apply to the purchases of supplies or materials or articles ordinarily available on the open market, or contracts for transportation or transmission of intelligence. This provision is hereby incorporated by reference into all applicable contracts. Proposer certifies that during the term of an award for all contracts by Sourcewell resulting from this procurement process, Proposer shall comply with applicable requirements as referenced above. 8.37 Rights to Inventions Made Under a Contract or Agreement. If the Federal award meets the definition of “funding agreement” under 37 CFR § 401.2 (a) and the recipient or subrecipient wishes to enter into a contract with a small business firm or nonprofit organization regarding the substitution of parties, assignment or performance of experimental, developmental, or research work under that “funding agreement,” the recipient or subrecipient must comply with the requirements of 37 CFR Part 401, “Rights to Inventions Made by Nonprofit Organizations and Small Business Firms Under Government Grants, Contracts and Cooperative Agreements,” and any implementing regulations issued by the awarding agency. Proposer certifies that during the term of an award for all contracts by Sourcewell resulting from this procurement process, Proposer shall comply with applicable requirements as referenced above. 8.38 Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251- 1387). Contracts and subgrants of amounts in excess of $150,000 require the non-Federal award to agree to comply with all applicable standards, orders or regulations issued pursuant to the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401- 7671q) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251- 1387). 34 Violations shall be reported to the Federal awarding agency and the Regional Office of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Proposer certifies that during the term of an award for all contracts by Sourcewell resulting from this procurement process, Proposer shall comply with applicable requirements as referenced above. 8.39 Debarment and Suspension (Executive Orders 12549 and 12689). A contract award (see 2 CFR 180.220) must not be made to parties listed on the government wide exclusions in the System for Award Management (SAM), in accordance with the OMB guidelines at 2 CFR 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 (3 CFR part 1986 Comp., p. 189) and 12689 (3 CFR part 1989 Comp., p. 235), “Debarment and Suspension.” SAM Exclusions contains the names of parties debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded by agencies, as well as parties declared ineligible under statutory or regulatory authority other than Executive Order 12549. Proposer nor its principals shall be presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation by any federal department or agency. 8.40 Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment, as amended (31 U.S.C. 1352). Proposers shall file any required certifications. Proposers shall not have used Federal appropriated funds to pay any person or organization for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a member of Congress, officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with obtaining any Federal contract, grant or any other award covered by 31 U.S.C. 1352. Proposers shall disclose any lobbying with non-Federal funds that takes place in connection with obtaining any Federal award. Such disclosures are forwarded from tier to tier up to the non-Federal award. Proposers shall file all certifications and disclosures required by, and otherwise comply with, the Byrd Anti- Lobbying Amendment (31 USC 1352). 8.41 Record Retention Requirements. To the extent applicable, Proposer shall comply with the record retention requirements detailed in 2 CFR § 200.333. The Vendor further certifies that Vendor will retain all records as required by 2 CFR § 200.333 for a period of three years after grantees or subgrantees submit final expenditure reports or quarterly or annual financial reports, as applicable, and all other pending matters are closed. 8.42 Energy Policy and Conservation Act Compliance. To the extent applicable, Proposer shall comply with the mandatory standards and policies relating to energy efficiency which are contained in the state energy conservation plan issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. 8.43 Buy American Provisions Compliance. To the extent applicable, Proposer agrees to comply with 49 U.S.C. § 50101, which provides that Federal funds may not be obligated unless all steel and manufactured goods used in AIP funded projects are produced in the United States, unless the Federal Aviation Administration has issued a waiver for the product; the product is listed as an Excepted Article, Material Or Supply in Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 25.108; or is included in the FAA Nationwide Buy American Waivers Issued list. Purchases made in accordance with the Buy American Act shall follow the applicable procurement rules calling for free and open competition. 8.44 Title VI Solicitation Notice. Sourcewell, in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 252, 42 USC §§ 2000d to 2000d-4) and the Regulations, hereby notifies all bidders or offerors that it will affirmatively ensure that any contract entered into pursuant to this advertisement, disadvantaged business enterprises or airport concession disadvantaged business enterprises will be afforded full and fair opportunity to submit bids in response to this invitation and will not be discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in consideration for an award. 8.45 Trade Restriction Certification. To the extent applicable, Proposer will comply with the provision in 49 U.S.C. § 50104 regarding certification and notice requirements for firm ownership or control by one or 35 more citizens of a foreign county listed by the Office of the United States Trade Representative as discriminating against U.S. firms. 8.46 Procurement of Recovered Materials. To the extent applicable, Proposer agrees to comply with Section 6002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the regulatory provisions of 40 CFR Part 247. 8.47 Access to Records (2 CFR § 200.336). Proposer agrees that duly authorized representatives of an Agency shall have access to any books, documents, papers and records of Proposer that are directly pertinent to Proposer’s discharge of its obligations under the Contract for the purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts, and transcriptions. The right also includes timely and reasonable access to Proposer’s personnel for the purpose of interview and discussion relating to such documents. 9 FORMS [THE REST OF THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK.] 36 Form A PROPOSER QUESTIONNAIRE- General Business Information (Products, Pricing, Sector Specific, Services, Terms and Warranty are addressed on Form P) Proposer Name: ____________________________Questionnaire completed by: ________________________________ Please identify the person Sourcewell should correspond with from now through the Award process: Name: _____________________________________ E-Mail address: _______________________________________ Please answer and submit the electronic version of the questions below in Microsoft Word® This allows Sourcewell evaluators to cut and paste your answers into a separate worksheet. Place your answer directly below each question. Sourcewell prefers a brief but thorough response to each question. Please do not merely attach additional documents to your response without also providing a substantive response. Do not leave answers blank; mark “NA” if the question does not apply to you (preferably with an explanation). Please create a response that is easy to read and understand. For example, you may consider using a different font and color to distinguish your answer from the questions. Company Information & Financial Strength 1) Provide the full legal name, mailing and email addresses, tax identification number, and telephone number for your business. 2) Provide a brief history of your company, including your company’s core values, business philosophy, and longevity in the HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES industry. 3) Provide a detailed description of the products and services that you are offering in your proposal. 4) What are your company’s expectations in the event of an award? 5) Demonstrate your financial strength and stability with meaningful data. This could include such items as financial statements, SEC filings, credit and bond ratings, letters of credit, and detailed reference letters. 6) What is your US market share for the solutions that you are proposing? What is your Canadian market share, if any? 7) Has your business ever petitioned for bankruptcy protection? Please explain in detail. 8) How is your organization best described: is it a manufacturer, a distributor/dealer/reseller, or a service provider? Answer whichever question (either a) or b) just below) best applies to your organization. a) If your company is best described as a distributor/dealer/reseller (or similar entity), please provide your written authorization to act as a distributor/dealer/reseller for the manufacturer of the products proposed in this RFP. If applicable, is your dealer network independent or company owned? b) If your company is best described as a manufacturer or service provider, please describe your relationship with your sales and service force and with your dealer network in delivering the products and services proposed in this RFP. Are these individuals your employees, or the employees of a third party? 9) If applicable, provide a detailed explanation outlining the licenses and certifications that are both required to be held, and actually held, by your organization (including third parties and subcontractors that you use) in pursuit of the business contemplated by this RFP. 10) Provide all “Suspension or Disbarment” information that has applied to your organization during the past ten years. 11) Within this RFP category there may be subcategories of solutions. List subcategory titles that best describe your products and services. 37 Industry Recognition & Marketplace Success 12) Describe any relevant industry awards or recognition that your company has received in the past five years. 13) Supply three references/testimonials from your customers who are eligible for Sourcewell membership. At a minimum, please include the entity’s name, contact person, and phone number. 14) Provide a list of your top five governmental or educational customers (entity name is optional), including entity type, the state the entity is located in, scope of the projects, size of transactions, and dollar volumes from the past three years. 15) Indicate separately what percentages of your sales are to the government and education sectors in the past three years? 16) List any state or cooperative purchasing contracts that you hold. What is the annual sales volume for each of these contracts over the past three years? 17) List any GSA contracts that you hold. What is the annual sales volume for each of these contracts over the past three years? Proposer’s Ability to Sell and Deliver Service Nationwide 18) Describe your company’s capability to meet Sourcewell Member’s needs across the country. Your response should address at least the following areas. a) Sales force. b) Dealer network or other distribution methods. c) Service force. Please include details, such as the locations of your network of sales and service providers, the number of workers (full- time equivalents) involved in each sector, whether these workers are your direct employees (or employees of a third party), and any overlap between the sales and service functions. 19) Describe in detail the process and procedure of your customer service program, if applicable. Please include your response-time capabilities and commitments, as well as any incentives that help your providers meet your stated service goals or promises. 20) a) Identify any geographic areas of the United States that you will NOT be fully serving through the proposed contract. b) Identify any Sourcewell Member sectors (i.e., government, education, not-for-profit) that you will NOT be fully serving through the proposed contract. Please explain your answer. For example, does your company have only a regional presence, or do other cooperative purchasing contracts limit your ability to promote another contract? 21) Define any specific contract requirements or restrictions that would apply to our Members in Hawaii and Alaska and in US Territories. Marketing Plan 22) If you are awarded a contract, how will you train your sales management, dealer network, and direct sales teams (whichever apply) to ensure maximum impact? Please include how you will communicate your Sourcewell pricing and other contract detail to your sales force nationally. 23) Describe your marketing strategy for promoting this contract opportunity. Please include representative samples of your marketing materials in electronic format. 24) Describe your use of technology and digital data (e.g., social media, metadata usage) to enhance marketing effectiveness. 38 25) In your view, what is Sourcewell’s role in promoting contracts arising out of this RFP? How will you integrate a Sourcewell-awarded contract into your sales process? 26) Are your products or services available through an e-procurement ordering process? If so, describe your e-procurement system and how governmental and educational customers have used it. Value-Added Attributes 27) Describe any product, equipment, maintenance, or operator training programs that you offer to Sourcewell Members. Please include details, such as whether training is standard or optional, who provides training, and any costs that apply. 28) Describe any technological advances that your proposed products or services offer. 29) Describe any “green” initiatives that relate to your company or to your products or services, and include a list of the certifying agency for each. 30) Describe any Women or Minority Business Entity (WMBE) or Small Business Entity (SBE) certifications that your company or hub partners have obtained. 31) What unique attributes does your company, your products, or your services offer to Sourcewell Members? What makes your proposed solutions unique in your industry as it applies to Sourcewell members? 32) Identify your ability and willingness to provide your products and services to Sourcewell member agencies in Canada. 33) Sourcewell Members may intend to use funds from a federal grant or contract under the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). In that event, state your ability and willingness to complete, execute, and provide the “Required FEMA Terms and Conditions Certification” form attached as Appendix D to the RFP. NOTE: Questions regarding Payment Terms, Warranty, Products/Equipment/Services, Pricing and Delivery, and Industry Specific Items are addressed on Form P. Signature: __________________________________________________________ Date: ________________________ 39 Form B PROPOSER INFORMATION Company Name: _________________________________________________________________________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip: ___________________________________________________________________________ Phone: _____________________________________ Fax: ____________________________________ Toll-Free Number: ___________________________ E-mail: __________________________________ Website Address: _______________________________________________________________________________ COMPANY PERSONNEL CONTACTS Authorized signer for your organization Name: _________________________________________________________________________________ Email: _________________________________________________Phone: ___________________________________ The person identified here must have proper signing authority to sign the “Proposer’s Assurance of Compliance” on behalf of the Proposer. Who prepared your RFP response? Name:__________________________________________________Title:______________________________________ Email: _________________________________________________Phone:_____________________________________ Who is your company’s primary contact person for this proposal? Name: _________________________________________Title:______________________________________ Email: _________________________________________Phone:_____________________________________ Other important contact information Name: _________________________________________Title:______________________________________ Email: _________________________________________Phone:_____________________________________ Name: _________________________________________Title:______________________________________ Email: _________________________________________Phone:_____________________________________ 40 Form C EXCEPTIONS TO PROPOSAL, TERMS, CONDITIONS, AND SOLUTIONS REQUEST Company Name: _____________________________________________________________________________ Any exceptions to the terms, conditions, specifications, or proposal forms contained in this RFP must be noted in writing and included with the Proposer’s response. The Proposer acknowledges that the exceptions listed may or may not be accepted by Sourcewell or included in the final contract. Sourcewell will make reasonable efforts to accommodate the listed exceptions and may clarify the exceptions in the appropriate section below. Section/page Term, Condition, or Specification Exception Sourcewell ACCEPTS Proposer’s Signature: ______________________________________________________ Date: ________________ Sourcewell’s clarification on exceptions listed above: 41 Contract Award RFP #032119 FORM D Formal Offering of Proposal (To be completed only by the Proposer) HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES In compliance with the Request for Proposal (RFP) for HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES, the undersigned warrants that the Proposer has examined this RFP and, being familiar with all of the instructions, terms and conditions, general and technical specifications, sales and service expectations, and any special terms, agrees to furnish the defined products and related services in full compliance with all terms and conditions of this RFP, any applicable amendments of this RFP, and all Proposer’s response documentation. The Proposer further understands that it accepts the full responsibility as the sole source of solutions proposed in this RFP response and that the Proposer accepts responsibility for any subcontractors used to fulfill this proposal. Company Name: _______________________________ Date: ___________________________________________ Company Address: _______________________________________________________________________________ City:_________________________________________ State: ____________ Zip: __________________________ CAGE Code/DUNS:____________________________ Contact Person: ________________________________ Title: ___________________________________________ Authorized Signature: ____________________________________________________________________________ (Name printed or typed) 42 FORM E CONTRACT ACCEPTANCE AND AWARD (Top portion of this form will be completed by Sourcewell if the vendor is awarded a contract. The vendor should complete the vendor authorized signatures as part of the RFP response.) Sourcewell Contract #: 032119-XXX Proposer’s full legal name: TBD Based on Sourcewell’s evaluation of your proposal, you have been awarded a contract. As an awarded vendor, you agree to provide the products and services contained in your proposal and to meet all of the terms and conditions set forth in this RFP, in any amendments to this RFP, and in any exceptions that are accepted by Sourcewell. The effective date of the Contract will be MM DD, YYYY and will expire on MM DD, YYYY (no later than the later of four years from the expiration date of the currently awarded contract or four years from the date that the Sourcewell Chief Procurement Officer awards the Contract). This Contract may be extended for a fifth year at Sourcewell’s discretion. Sourcewell Authorized Signatures: _____________________________________________ Jeremy Schwartz SOURCEWELL DIRECTOR OF COOPERATIVE CONTRACTS (NAME PRINTED OR TYPED) AND PROCUREMENT/CPO SIGNATURE _____________________________________________ Chad Coauette SOURCEWELL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/CEO SIGNATURE (NAME PRINTED OR TYPED) Awarded on MM DD, YYYY Sourcewell Contract # 032119-XXX --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Vendor Authorized Signatures: The Vendor hereby accepts this Contract award, including all accepted exceptions and amendments. Vendor Name _____________________________________________________________________ Authorized Signatory’s Title _________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ VENDOR AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE (NAME PRINTED OR TYPED) Executed on _____________, 20___ Sourcewell Contract # 032119-XXX 43 Form F PROPOSER ASSURANCE OF COMPLIANCE Proposal Affidavit Signature Page PROPOSER’S AFFIDAVIT The undersigned, authorized representative of the entity submitting the foregoing proposal (the “Proposer”), swears that the following statements are true to the best of his or her knowledge. 1. The Proposer is submitting its proposal under its true and correct name, the Proposer has been properly originated and legally exists in good standing in its state of residence, the Proposer possesses, or will possess before delivering any products and related services, all applicable licenses necessary for such delivery to Sourcewell members agencies. The undersigned affirms that he or she is authorized to act on behalf of, and to legally bind the Proposer to the terms in this Contract. 2. The Proposer, or any person representing the Proposer, has not directly or indirectly entered into any agreement or arrangement with any other vendor or supplier, any official or employee of Sourcewell, or any person, firm, or corporation under contract with Sourcewell, in an effort to influence the pricing, terms, or conditions relating to this RFP in any way that adversely affects the free and open competition for a Contract award under this RFP. 3. The Proposer has examined and understands the terms, conditions, scope, contract opportunity, specifications request, and other documents in this solicitation and affirms that any and all exceptions have been noted in writing and have been included with the Proposer’s RFP response. 4. The Proposer will, if awarded a Contract, provide to Sourcewell Members the /products and services in accordance with the terms, conditions, and scope of this RFP, with the Proposer-offered specifications, and with the other documents in this solicitation. 5. The Proposer agrees to deliver products and services through valid contracts, purchase orders, or means that are acceptable to Sourcewell Members. Unless otherwise agreed to, the Proposer must provide only new and first- quality products and related services to Sourcewell Members under an awarded Contract. 6. The Proposer will comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local laws, regulations, rules, and orders. 7. The Proposer understands that Sourcewell will reject RFP proposals that are marked “confidential” (or “nonpublic,” etc.), either substantially or in their entirety. Under Minnesota Statute §13.591, Subd. 4, all proposals are considered nonpublic data until the evaluation is complete and a Contract is awarded. At that point, proposals generally become public data. Minnesota Statute §13.37 permits only certain narrowly defined data to be considered a “trade secret,” and thus nonpublic data under Minnesota’s Data Practices Act. 8. The Proposer understands that it is the Proposer’s duty to protect information that it considers nonpublic, and it agrees to defend and indemnify Sourcewell for reasonable measures that Sourcewell takes to uphold such a data designation. [The rest of this page has been left intentionally blank. Signature page below] 44 By signing below, Proposer is acknowledging that he or she has read, understands, and agrees to comply with the terms and conditions specified above. Company Name: Address: ____________________________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip: _______________________________________________________________________________ Telephone Number: ______________________________________________________________ E-mail Address:______________________________________________________________________________ Authorized Signature: _________________________________________________________________________ Authorized Name (printed): ______________________________________________________________________ Title: _______________________________________________________________________________________ Date: _______________________________________________________________________________________ Notarized Subscribed and sworn to before me this ______________ day of ___________________, 20______________ Notary Public in and for the County of __________________________________________ State of __________ My commission expires: _______________________________________________________________________ Signature: __________________________________________________________________________________ 45 Form G OVERALL EVALUATION AND CRITERIA For the Proposed Subject HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES Conformance to RFP Terms and Conditions 50 Financial Viability and Marketplace Success 75 Ability to Sell and Deliver Service Nationwide 100 Marketing Plan 50 Value-Added Attributes 75 Warranty 50 Depth and Breadth of Offered Products and Related Services 200 Pricing 400 TOTAL POINTS 1000 Reviewed by: _________________________________________ Its_________________________________ _________________________________________Its_________________________________ 46 Form P PROPOSER QUESTIONNAIRE Payment Terms, Warranty, Products and Services, Pricing and Delivery, and Industry-Specific Questions Proposer Name: _________________________________________________________________________ Questionnaire completed by: ______________________________________________________________ Payment Terms and Financing Options 1) What are your payment terms (e.g., net 10, net 30)? 2) Do you provide leasing or financing options, especially those options that schools and governmental entities may need to use in order to make certain acquisitions? 3) Briefly describe your proposed order process. Please include enough detail to support your ability to report quarterly sales to Sourcewell. For example, indicate whether your dealer network is included in your response and whether each dealer (or some other entity) will process the Sourcewell Members’ purchase orders. 4) Do you accept the P-card procurement and payment process? If so, is there any additional cost to Sourcewell Members for using this process? Warranty 5) Describe in detail your manufacturer warranty program, including conditions and requirements to qualify, claims procedure, and overall structure. You may include in your response a copy of your warranties, but at a minimum please also answer the following questions. Do your warranties cover all products, parts, and labor? Do your warranties impose usage restrictions or other limitations that adversely affect coverage? Do your warranties cover the expense of technicians’ travel time and mileage to perform warranty repairs? Are there any geographic regions of the United States for which you cannot provide a certified technician to perform warranty repairs? How will Sourcewell Members in these regions be provided service for warranty repair? Will you cover warranty service for items made by other manufacturers that are part of your proposal, or are these warranties issues typically passed on to the original equipment manufacturer? What are your proposed exchange and return programs and policies? 6) Describe any service contract options for the items included in your proposal. Pricing, Delivery, Audits, and Administrative Fee 7) Provide a general narrative description of the equipment/products and related services you are offering in your proposal. 8) Describe your pricing model (e.g., line-item discounts or product-category discounts). Provide detailed pricing data (including standard or list pricing and the Sourcewell discounted price) on all of the items that you want Sourcewell to consider as part of your RFP response. If applicable, provide a SKU for each item in your proposal. (Keep in mind 47 that reasonable price and product adjustments can be made during the term of an awarded Contract. See the body of the RFP and the Price and Product Change Request Form for more detail.) 9) Please quantify the discount range presented in this response. For example, indicate that the pricing in your response represents is a 50% percent discount from the MSRP or your published list. 10) The pricing offered in this proposal is ________a. the same as the Proposer typically offers to an individual municipality, university, or school district. ________b. the same as the Proposer typically offers to GPOs, cooperative procurement organizations, or state purchasing departments. _________c. better than the Proposer typically offers to GPOs, cooperative procurement organizations, or state purchasing departments. ________d. other than what the Proposer typically offers (please describe). 11) Describe any quantity or volume discounts or rebate programs that you offer. 12) Propose a method of facilitating “sourced” products or related services, which may be referred to as “open market” items or “nonstandard options”. For example, you may supply such items “at cost” or “at cost plus a percentage,” or you may supply a quote for each such request. 13) Identify any total cost of acquisition costs that are NOT included in the pricing submitted with your response. This cost includes all additional charges that are not directly identified as freight or shipping charges. For example, list costs for items like installation, set up, mandatory training, or initial/pre-delivery inspection. Identify any parties that impose such costs and their relationship to the Proposer. 14) If travel expense, delivery or shipping is an additional cost to the Sourcewell Member, describe in detail the complete travel expense, shipping and delivery program. 15) Specifically describe those travel expense, shipping and delivery programs for Alaska, Hawaii, Canada, or any offshore delivery. 16) Describe any unique distribution and/or delivery methods or options offered in your proposal. 17) Please specifically describe any self-audit process or program that you plan to employ to verify compliance with your proposed Contract with Sourcewell. This process includes ensuring that Sourcewell Members obtain the proper pricing, that the Vendor reports all sales under the Contract each quarter, and that the Vendor remits the proper administrative fee to Sourcewell. 18) Identify a proposed administrative fee that you will pay to Sourcewell for facilitating, managing, and promoting the Sourcewell Contract in the event that you are awarded a Contract. This fee is typically calculated as a percentage of Vendor’s sales under the Contract or as a per-unit fee; it is not a line-item addition to the Member’s cost of goods. (See RFP Section 6.29 and following for details.) Industry-Specific Questions 19) Describe any industry-specific quality management system certifications obtained by your organization. 20) Describe any environmental management system certifications obtained by your organization. 21) Describe any preventive maintenance programs that your organization offers for the solutions you are proposing in your response. Signature: ___________________________________________________________Date: _______________________ 48 10 PRE-SUBMISSION CHECKLIST Check when Completed Contents of Your Bid Proposal Hard Copy Required Signed and Dated Electronic Copy Required – Flash Drive or CD Form A: Proposer Questionnaire with all questions answered completely X – signature page only X Form B: Proposer Information X Form C: Exceptions to Proposal, Terms, Conditions, and Solutions Request X X Form D: Formal Offering of Proposal X X Form E: Contract Acceptance and Award X Form F: Proposers Assurance of Compliance X X Form P: Proposer Questionnaire with all questions answered completely X – signature page only X Certificate of Insurance with $1.5 million coverage X X Copy of all RFP Addendums issued by Sourcewell X X Pricing for all Products/Equipment/Services within the RFP being proposed X Entire Proposal submittal including signed documents and forms X All forms in the Hard Copy Required Signed and Dated should be inserted in the front of the submitted response, unbound Package containing your proposal labeled and sealed with the following language: “Competitive Proposal Enclosed, Hold for Public Opening XX-XX-XXXX” Response Package mailed and delivered prior to deadline to: Sourcewell, 202 12th St NE, PO Box 219 Staples, MN 56479 49 11 SOURCEWELL VENDOR PRICE AND PRODUCT CHANGE REQUEST FORM Section 1. Instructions for Vendor Requests for product or service changes, additions, or deletions will be considered at any time throughout the awarded contract term. All requests must be made in writing by completing sections 2, 3, and 4 of this Sourcewell Price and Product Change Request Form and signed by an authorized Vendor representative in section 5. All changes are subject to review by the Sourcewell Procurement Manager and to approval by Sourcewell’s Chief Procurement Officer. Submit request through email to your assigned Sourcewell Contract Administrator. Sourcewell will determine whether the request is 1) within the scope of the original RFP, and 2) in the best interests of Sourcewell and Sourcewell Members. Approved Price and Product Change Request Forms will be signed and emailed to the Vendor contact. The Vendor must complete this change request form and individually list or attach all items or services subject to change, must provide sufficiently detailed explanation and documentation for the change, and must include a complete restatement of pricing documentation in an appropriate format (preferably Microsoft® Excel®). The pricing document must identify all products and services being offered and must conform to the following Sourcewell product/price change naming convention: (Vendor Name) (Sourcewell Contract #) (effective pricing date); for example, “Acme Widget Company #012416-AWC eff. 01-01-2017.” NOTE: New pricing restatements must include all products and services offered regardless of whether their prices have changed and must include a new “effective date” on the pricing documents. This requirement reduces confusion by providing a single, current pricing sheet for each Vendor and creates a historical record of pricing. ADDITIONS. New products and related services may be added to a contract if such additions are within the scope of the original RFP. DELETIONS. New products and related services may be deleted from a contract if, for example, they are no longer available or have been modified to a point where they are outside the scope of the RFP. PRICE CHANGES: Vendors may request price changes if they provide sufficient rationale for the change. For example, a Vendor that manufactures products that require substantial petroleum-related material might request a 3% price increase because of a 20% increase in petroleum costs. Price decreases: Sourcewell expects Vendors to propose their very best prices and anticipates that price reductions might occur because of improved technologies or marketplace efficiencies. Price increases: Acceptable price increases typically result from specific Vendor cost increases. The Vendor must include reasonable justification for the price increase and must not, for example, offer merely generalized statements about an increase in a cost-of-living index. Appropriate documentation should be attached to this form, including such items as letters from suppliers announcing price increases. Refer to the RFP for complete “Pricing” details. Section 2. Vendor Name and Type of Change Request CHECK ALL CHANGES THAT APPLY: AWARDED VENDOR NAME: ☐ Adding Products/Services vices ☐ Deleting Products/Services ☐ Price Increase SOURCEWELL CONTRACT NUMBER: ☐ Price Decrease 50 Section 3. Detailed Explanation of Need for Changes List the products and/or services that are changing or being added or deleted from the previous contract price list, along with the percentage change for each item or category. (Attach a separate, detailed document if changing more than 10 items.) Provide a general statement and documentation explaining the reasons for these price and/or product changes. EXAMPLES: 1) “All pricing for paper products and services are increased 5% because of increased raw material and transportation costs (see attached documentation of fuel and raw materials increase).” 2) “The 6400 series floor polisher is being added to the product list as a new model, replacing the 5400 series. The 6400 series 3% increase reflects technological changes that improve the polisher’s efficiency and useful life. The 5400 series is now included in the “Hot List” at a 20% discount from the previous pricing until the remaining inventory is liquidated.” If adding products, state how these are within the scope of the original RFP. If changing prices or adding products or services, state how the pricing is consistent with existing Sourcewell contract pricing. 51 Section 4. Complete Restatement of Pricing Submitted A COMPLETE restatement of the pricing, including all new and existing products and services is attached and has been emailed to the Vendor’s Contract Administrator. ☐ Yes ☐ No Section 5. Signatures __________________________________________________________ ________________________ Vendor Authorized Signature Date ____________________________________________ Print Name and Title of Authorized Signer __________________________________________________________ _________________________ Jeremy Schwartz Date Sourcewell Director of Cooperative Contracts and Procurement/CPO 52 Appendix A Sourcewell on behalf of itself and its current and potential Member agencies, which includes all governmental, higher education, K-12 education, not-for-profit, tribal governmental, and all other public agencies located in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national contract solution. For your reference, the links below include some, but not all, of the entities included in this proposal. http://www.usa.gov/Agencies/Local_Government/Cities.shtml http://nces.ed.gov/globallocator/ https://www.census.gov/2010census/partners/pdf/FIPS_StateCounty_Code.pdf http://nccs.urban.org/sites/all/nccs-archive/html//PubApps/search.php https://www.usa.gov/tribes#item-37647 http://www.usa.gov/Agencies/State-and-Territories.shtml Oregon Hawaii Washington Appendix B ‐ Political Subdivision List for HI, ID, OR, SC, UT, WAHawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonCounty County County County County CountyHawaii County Ada County Baker County Abbeville County Beaver County Adams CountyKauai County Adams County Benton County Aiken County Box Elder County Asotin CountyMaui County Bannock County Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council Allendale County Cache County Benton CountyMunicipalityBear Lake County Clackamas County Anderson County Carbon County Chelan CountyCity and County of Honolulu Benewah County Clackamas County Service District No. 1 Bamberg County Daggett County Clallam CountyHigher EducationBingham County Clatsop County Barnwell County Davis County Clark CountyHawaii Community College Blaine County Columbia County Beaufort County Duchesne County Columbia CountyHonolulu Community College Boise County Coos County Berkeley County Duchesne County Special Service District No. 2 Cowlitz CountyUniversity of Hawaii Bonner County Crook County Calhoun County Emery County Douglas CountyUniversity of Hawaii Research Corporation Bonneville County Curry County Catawba Regional Council of Governments Five County Association of Governments Ferry CountyWindward Community College Boundary County Deschutes County Central Midlands Council of Governments Garfield County Franklin CountyEducation (K‐12)Butte County Douglas County Charleston County Grand County Garfield CountyHanalani Schools Camas County Gilliam County Cherokee County Iron County Grant CountyKamehameha Schools Canyon County Grant County Chester County Juab County Grays Harbor CountySpecial DistrictCaribou County Harney County Chesterfield County Kane County Island CountyHawaii Community Development Authority Cassia County Hood River County Clarendon County Millard County Jefferson CountyHawaii Public Housing Authority Clark County Jackson County Colleton County Morgan County King CountyHawaii Tourism Authority Clearwater County Jefferson County Darlington County Piute County King County Directors' AssociationHonolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation Custer County Josephine County Dillon County Rich County Kitsap CountyNatural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority Elmore County Klamath County Dorchester County Salt Lake County Kittitas CountyStateFranklin County Lake County Edgefield County San Juan County Klickitat CountyHawaii Department of Accounting and General ServicesFremont County Lane Council of Governments Fairfield County Sanpete County Lewis CountyHawaii Department of Finance and Administration Gem County Lane County Florence County Sevier County Lincoln CountyHawaii Department of Health Gooding County Lincoln County Georgetown County Summit County Mason CountyHawaii Employer‐Union Health Benefits Trust Fund Idaho County Linn County Greenville County Tooele County Okanogan CountyHawaii Health Systems Corporation Jefferson County Malheur CountyGreenwood County Uintah County Pacific CountyState Of Hawaii Jerome County Marion County Hampton County Utah County Pend Oreille CountyKootenai County Marion County Housing Authority Horry County Wasatch County Pierce CountyLatah County Morrow County Jasper County Washington County San Juan CountyLemhi County Multnomah County Kershaw County Wayne County Skagit CountyLewis County Polk County Lancaster County Weber County Skamania CountyLincoln County Sherman County Laurens CountyMunicipalitySnohomish CountyMadison County Tillamook County Lee County Centerfield City Spokane CountyMinidoka County Umatilla County Lexington County City of Alpine City Stevens CountyNez Perce County Union County Lower Savannah Council of Governments City of American Fork Thurston CountyOneida County Wallowa County Marion County City of Aurora Thurston Regional Planning CouncilOwyhee County Wasco County Marlboro County City of Ballard Wahkiakum CountyPayette County Washington County McCormick County City of Beaver Walla Walla CountyPower County Wheeler County Newberry County City of Blanding Whatcom CountyShoshone County Yamhill County Oconee County City of Bluffdale Whitman CountyTeton CountyMunicipalityOrangeburg County City of Bountiful Yakima CountyTwin Falls County City of Adair Village Pickens County City of Brigham Yakima County Public ServicesValley County City of Adrian Richland County City of Castle Dale Yakima Valley Conference of GovernmentsWashington County City of Albany Saluda County City of Cedar CityMunicipalityMunicipalityCity of Amity Spartanburg County City of Cedar Hills City of AberdeenCity of Aberdeen City of Arlington Sumter County City of Centerville City of Airway HeightsCity of Albion City of Ashland Union County City of Clearfield City of AlgonaCity of American Falls City of Astoria Williamsburg County City of Clinton City of AnacortesCity of Ammon City of Athena York County City of Coalville City of ArlingtonCity of Arco City of AumsvilleMunicipalityCity of Colorado City City of AsotinCity of Arimo City of Aurora City of Abbeville City of Corinne City City of AuburnCity of Ashton City of Baker City City of Aiken City of Cottonwood Heights City of Bainbridge IslandCity of Athol City of Bandon City of Anderson City of Delta City of Battle GroundCity of Atomic City City of Banks City of Barnwell City of Draper City of BellevueCity of Bancroft City of Bay City City of Beaufort City of Duchesne City of BellinghamCity of Bellevue City of Beaverton City of Belton City of East Carbon City of Benton CityCity of Blackfoot City of Bend City of Bennettsville City of Elk Ridge City of BingenCity of Bliss City of Boardman City of Bishopville City of Elmo City of Black DiamondCity of Bloomington City of Brookings City of Camden City of EnochCity of BlaineCity of Boise City of Brownsville City of Cayce City of EnterpriseCity of Bonney LakeCity of Bonners Ferry City of Burns City of Charleston City of Ephraim City of BothellCity of Bovill City of Canby City of Chesnee City of Escalante City of BremertonCity of Buhl City of Cannon Beach City of Chester City of Eureka City of BrewsterCity of Burley City of Canyonville City of Clemson City of Fairview City of BridgeportCity of Caldwell City of Carlton City of Clinton City of FarmingtonCity of BrierCity of Cambridge City of Cascade Locks City of Columbia City of Farr West City of BuckleyCity of Carey City of Cave Junction City of Conway City of Ferron City of BurienCity of Cascade City of Central Point City of Darlington City of Fillmore City of BurlingtonCity of Castleford City of Chiloquin City of Denmark City of Fountain Green City of CamasCity of Challis City of Clatskanie City of Dillon City of Fruit Heights City of CarnationCity of Chubbuck City of Coburg City of Easley City of Garland City of CashmereCity of Clayton City of Columbia City City of Florence City of Grantsville City of Castle RockCity of Clifton City of Condon City of Folly Beach City of Green River City of CentraliaCity of Coeur d'Alene City of Coos Bay City of Forest Acres City of Gunnison City of ChehalisCity of Council City of Coquille City of Fountain Inn City of Harrisville City of ChelanCity of Craigmont City of Cornelius City of Gaffney City of Heber City City of CheneyCity of Crouch City of Corvallis City of Georgetown City of Helper City City of ChewelahAppendix BPage 1 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonCity of Culdesac City of Cottage Grove City of Goose Creek City of Herriman City of ClarkstonCity of Dalton Gardens City of Cove City of Greenville City of Highland City of Cle ElumCity of Dayton City of Creswell City of Greenwood City of Hildale City of Clyde HillCity of Deary City of Culver City of Greer City of Holladay City of ColfaxCity of Dietrich City of Dallas City of Hanahan City of HoneyvilleCity of College PlaceCity of Donnelly City of Damascus City of Hardeeville City of Hooper City of ColvilleCity of Dover City of Dayton City of Hartsville City of HuntingtonCity of ConnellCity of Downey City of Dayville City of Inman City of Hurricane City of CosmopolisCity of Driggs City of Depoe Bay City of Isle of Palms City of Hyde Park City of CovingtonCity of Dubois City of Detroit City of Johnsonville City of Hyrum City of DavenportCity of Eagle City of Donald City of Lake City City of Ivins City of DaytonCity of Eden City of Drain City of Lancaster City of Kamas City of Deer ParkCity of Elk River City of Dundee City of Landrum City of Kanab City of Des MoinesCity of Emmett City of Dunes City City of Laurens City of Kaysville City of DuPontCity of Fairfield City of Durham City of Liberty City of La VerkinCity of DuvallCity of Fernan Lake Village City of Eagle Point City of Loris City of Layton City of East WenatcheeCity of Filer City of Echo City of Manning City of Lehi City of EdgewoodCity of Firth City of Elgin City of Marion City of Lewiston City of EdmondsCity of Franklin City of Enterprise City of Mauldin City of LindonCity of Electric CityCity of Fruitland City of Estacada City of Mullins City of Logan City of EllensburgCity of Garden City City of Eugene City of Myrtle Beach City of Manti City of ElmaCity of Genesee City of Fairview City of New Ellenton City of Mapleton City of EntiatCity of Georgetown City of Falls City City of Newberry City of Marriott‐Slaterville City of EnumclawCity of Glenns Ferry City of Florence City of North Augusta City of Mendon City of EphrataCity of Gooding City of Forest Grove City of North Charleston City of Midvale City of EverettCity of Grace City of Fossil City of North Myrtle Beach City of Midway City of EversonCity of Grand View City of Garibaldi City of Orangeburg City of Milford City of Federal WayCity of Grangeville City of Gaston City of Pickens City of Millville City of FerndaleCity of GreenleafCity of Gates City of Rock Hill City of Moab City of FifeCity of Hagerman City of Gearhart City of Seneca City of Mona City of FircrestCity of Hailey City of Gervais City of Simpsonville City of MonroeCity of ForksCity of Hansen City of Gladstone City of Spartanburg City of Monticello City of GeorgeCity of Harrison City of Glendale City of Sumter City of Morgan City of Gig HarborCity of Hayden City of Gold Beach City of Tega Cay City of Moroni City of Gold BarCity of Hazelton City of Gold Hill City of Travelers Rest City of Mt. Pleasant City City of GoldendaleCity of Heyburn City of Grants Pass City of Union City of Murray City of Grand CouleeCity of Hollister City of Greenhorn City of Walhalla City of MytonCity of GrandviewCity of Homedale City of Gresham City of Walterboro City of NaplesCity of GrangerCity of Hope City of Haines City of Wellford City of Nephi City of Granite FallsCity of Horseshoe Bend City of Halfway City of West Columbia City of Nibley City of HarringtonCity of Huetter City of Halsey City of Westminster City of North Logan City of HoquiamCity of Idaho City City of Happy Valley City of WoodruffCity of North Ogden City of IlwacoCity of Idaho Falls City of Harrisburg City of York City of North Salt Lake City of IssaquahCity of Inkom City of Helix Town of Allendale City of Oakley City of KahlotusCity of Island Park City of Heppner Town of Andrews City of Ogden City of KalamaCity of Jerome City of Hermiston Town of Atlantic Beach City of Orangeville City of KelsoCity of Juliaetta City of Hillsboro Town of Awendaw City of Orem City of KenmoreCity of Kamiah City of Hines Town of Aynor City of Panguitch City of KennewickCity of Kellogg City of Hood River Town of Batesburg‐Leesville City of Park City City of KentCity of Kendrick City of Hubbard Town of Bethune City of Parowan City of Kettle FallsCity of Ketchum City of Huntington Town of Blacksburg City of Payson City of KirklandCity of Kimberly City of Idanha Town of Blackville City of Perry City of KittitasCity of Kooskia City of Imbler Town of Blenheim City of Plain CityCity of La CenterCity of Kuna City of Independence Town of Bluffton City of Pleasant Grove City of LaceyCity of Lapwai City of Irrigon Town of Blythewood City of Pleasant View City of Lake Forest ParkCity of Lava Hot Springs City of Island City Town of Bowman City of Price City of Lake StevensCity of Lewiston City of Jacksonville Town of Branchville City of Providence City of LakewoodCity of Mackay City of Jefferson Town of Briarcliffe Acres City of Provo City of LangleyCity of Malad City City of John Day Town of Brunson City of Richfield City of LeavenworthCity of Marsing City of Johnson City Town of Calhoun Falls City of Richmond City of Liberty LakeCity of McCall City of Joseph Town of Cameron City of River Heights City of Long BeachCity of McCammon City of Junction City Town of Campobello City of Riverdale City of LongviewCity of Melba City of Keizer Town of Central City of Riverton City of LyndenCity of Menan City of King City Town of Chapin City of Roosevelt City of LynnwoodCity of Meridian City of Klamath Falls Town of Cheraw City of Roy City of MabtonCity of Middleton City of La Grande Town of Chesterfield City of Salem City of Maple ValleyCity of Midvale City of La Pine Town of Clio City of Salina City of MarysvilleCity of Moscow City of Lafayette Town of Clover City of Salt Lake City City of MattawaCity of Mountain Home City of Lake Oswego Town of Cottageville City of Sandy City of McClearyCity of Mullan City of Lakeside Town of Coward City of Santa ClaraCity of Medical LakeCity of Murtaugh City of Lebanon Town of Cowpens City of SantaquinCity of MedinaCity of Nampa City of Lincoln City Town of Denmark City of Saratoga Springs City of Mercer IslandCity of New Meadows City of Lonerock Town of Donalds City of Smithfield City City of MesaCity of New Plymouth City of Lostine Town of Due West City of South Jordan City of Mill CreekCity of Newdale City of Lowell Town of Duncan City of South Ogden City of MiltonCity of Nezperce City of Lyons Town of Eastover City of South Salt Lake City City of MonroeCity of Notus City of Madras Town of Edgefield City of South WeberCity of MontesanoCity of Orofino City of Malin Town of Edisto Beach City of Spanish Fork City of MortonCity of Osburn City of Manzanita Town of Ehrhardt City of Spring City City of Moses LakeCity of Parker City of Maupin Town of Elgin City of Springville City of MossyrockCity of Parma City of McMinnville Town of Elloree City of St. George City of Mountlake TerraceCity of Paul City of Medford Town of Estill City of Sunnyside City of MoxeeCity of Payette City of Metolius Town of Eutawville City of SunsetCity of Mt. VernonCity of Pierce City of Mill City Town of Fairfax City of Syracuse City of MukilteoCity of Pinehurst City of Millersburg Town of Ft. Mill City of Taylorsville City of NapavineCity of Plummer City of Milton‐Freewater Town of Furman City of Tooele City of NewcastleCity of Pocatello City of Milwaukie Town of Gaston City of Toquerville City of NewportCity of Ponderay City of Molalla Town of Gifford City of TremontonCity of NooksackCity of Post Falls City of Monmouth Town of Gilbert City of TropicCity of Normandy ParkCity of Potlatch City of Monroe Town of Govan City of Uintah City of North BendCity of Preston City of Monument Town of Gray Court City of VernalCity of North BonnevilleCity of Priest River City of Moro Town of Great Falls City of Washington City of Oak HarborCity of Rathdrum City of Mosier Town of Greeleyville City of Washington Terrace City of OakvilleCity of Reubens City of Mt. Angel Town of Hampton City of Wellington City of Ocean ShoresAppendix BPage 2 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonCity of Rexburg City of Mt. Vernon Town of Harleyville City of Wellsville City of OkanoganCity of Richfield City of Myrtle Creek Town of Heath Springs City of Wendover City of OlympiaCity of Rigby City of Myrtle Point Town of Hemingway City of West Bountiful City of OmakCity of Riggins City of Nehalem Town of Hilda City of West Haven City City of OrovilleCity of Ririe City of Newberg Town of Hilton Head Island City of West Jordan City of OrtingCity of Roberts City of Newport Town of Hodges City of West Point City of OthelloCity of Rockland City of North Bend Town of Holly Hill City of West Valley City City of PacificCity of Rupert City of North Plains Town of Hollywood City of Willard City of PalouseCity of Salmon City of North Powder Town of Honea Path City of Woodland Hills City of PascoCity of Sandpoint City of Nyssa Town of Irmo City of Woods Cross City of PaterosCity of Shelley City of Oakland Town of Iva Town of Alta City of PomeroyCity of Shoshone City of Oakridge Town of Jackson Town of AltamontCity of Port AngelesCity of Smelterville City of Ontario Town of James Island Town of Alton City of Port OrchardCity of Soda Springs City of Oregon City Town of Jamestown Town of Amalga City of Port TownsendCity of Spirit Lake City of Paisley Town of Jefferson Town of Annabella City of PoulsboCity of St. Anthony City of Pendleton Town of Jenkinsville Town of Antimony City of ProsserCity of St. Charles City of Philomath Town of Johnston Town of Apple Valley City of PullmanCity of Stanley City of Phoenix Town of Jonesville Town of BallardCity of PuyallupCity of Star City of Pilot Rock Town of Kershaw Town of Bear River City City of QuincyCity of Stites City of Port Orford Town of Kiawah Island Town of Bicknell City of RainierCity of Sugar City City of Portland Town of Kingstree Town of Big Water City of RaymondCity of Sun Valley City of Powers Town of Lake View Town of BoulderCity of RedmondCity of Tensed City of Prairie City Town of Lamar South Carolina Town of Brian Head City of RentonCity of Tetonia City of Prineville Town of Lane Town of Bryce Canyon City City of RepublicCity of Troy City of Rainier Town of Latta Town of Cannonville City of RichlandCity of Twin Falls City of Redmond Town of Lexington Town of Castle Valley City of RidgefieldCity of Ucon City of Reedsport Town of Lincolnville Town of Cedar Fort City of RitzvilleCity of Victor City of Richland Town of Little Mountain Town of Centerfield City of Rock IslandCity of Wallace City of Riddle Town of Lockhart Town of Central Valley City of RoslynCity of Weippe City of Rockaway Beach Town of Lyman Town of Circleville City of RoyCity of Weiser City of Rogue River Town of Lynchburg Town of Clarkston City of Royal CityCity of Wendell City of Roseburg Town of Mayesville Town of Clawson City of SammamishCity of Weston City of Rufus Town of McBee Town of Cleveland City of SeaTacCity of White Bird City of Salem Town of McClellanville Town of Cornish City of SeattleCity of Wilder City of Sandy Town of McColl Town of Daniel City of Sedro‐WoolleyCity of Winchester City of Scappoose Town of McCormick Town of Deweyville City of SelahHigher EducationCity of Scio Town of Meggett Town of Eagle Mountain City of SequimBoise State University City of Scotts Mills Town of Moncks CornerTown of Elmo City of SheltonCollege of Southern Idaho City of Seaside Town of Mt. Pleasant Town of Elsinore City of ShorelineCollege of Western Idaho City of Seneca Town of Neeses Town of Elwood City of SnohomishEastern Idaho Technical College City of Shady Cove Town of New Ellenton Town of Emery City of SnoqualmieIdaho Division of Professional Technical Education City of Sheridan Town of Nichols Town of Fairfield City of Soap LakeIdaho State University City of Sherwood Town of Ninety Six Town of Francis City of South BendLewis‐Clark State College City of Siletz Town of Norris Town of Garden City City of SpokaneNorth Idaho College City of Silverton Town of North Town of GenolaCity of Spokane ValleyUniversity of Idaho City of Sisters Town of Norway Town of Glendale City of SpragueEducation (K‐12)City of Sodaville Town of Olanta Town of Glenwood City of StanwoodAberdeen School District No. 58 City of Spray Town of Pacolet Town of Goshen City of StevensonArbon Elementary School District No. 383 City of Springfield Town of Pageland Town of Hanksville City of SultanAvery School District City of St. Helens Town of Pamplico Town of Hatch City of SumasBasin School District No. 72 City of St. Paul Town of Patrick Town of Henefer City of SumnerBear Lake County School District No. 33 City of Stanfield Town of Pawleys Island Town of Henrieville City of SunnysideBear Lake School District No. 33 City of Stayton Town of Pelion Town of Hideout City of TacomaBlackfoot School District No. 55 City of Sublimity Town of PelzerTown of Hinckley City of TekoaBlaine County School District No. 61 City of Sumpter Town of Pendleton Town of Holden City of TeninoBliss Joint School District No. 234 City of Sutherlin Town of Perry Town of Howell City of TietonBonneville Joint School District No. 93 City of Sweet Home Town of Port Royal Town of Huntsville City of ToledoBoundary County School District No. 101 City of Talent Town of Prosperity Town of Joseph City of TonasketBruneau‐Grand View Joint School District City of Tangent Town of Ravenel Town of Junction City of ToppenishBuhl Joint School District No. 412 City of The Dalles Town of Reidville Town of Kanarraville City of TukwilaButte County Joint School District No. 111 City of Tigard Town of Ridge Spring Town of Kanosh City of TumwaterCaldwell School District No. 132 City of Tillamook Town of Ridgeland Town of Kingston City of Union GapCamas County School District No. 121 City of Toledo Town of Ridgeville Town of Koosharem City of University PlaceCambridge School District City of Troutdale Town of Ridgeway Town of Leeds City of VaderCascade School District No. 422 City of Tualatin Town of Saint Matthews Town of Levan City of VancouverCassia County Joint School District No. 151 City of Turner Town of Saint Stephen Town of Loa City of WaitsburgCastleford Joint School District No. 417 City of Ukiah Town of Salem Town of Manila City of Walla WallaChallis Joint School District No. 181 City of Umatilla Town of Salley Town of Mantua City of WapatoClark County School District No. 161 City of Union Town of SaludaTown of Marysvale City of WardenCoeur d'Alene School District No. 271 City of Unity Town of Santee Town of Meadow City of WashougalCottonwood Joint School District No. 242 City of Vale Town of Scranton Town of Minersville City of WenatcheeCouncil School District No. 13 City of Veneta Town of Seabrook Island Town of New Harmony City of West RichlandCuldesac Joint School District No. 342 City of Vernonia Town of Sellers Town of Newton City of WestportDietrich School District No. 314 City of Waldport Town of Sharon Town of Ophir City of White SalmonEmmett Independent School District No. 221 City of Wallowa Town of Six Mile Town of Orderville City of WinlockFiler School District No. 413 City of Warrenton Town of Snelling Town of Paradise City of WoodinvilleFirth School District No. 59 City of Wasco Town of Society Hill Town of Paragonah City of WoodlandFremont County School District No. 215 City of West Linn Town of South Congaree Town of Portage Utah City of Yakima/Yakima CountyFruitland School District No. 373 City of Westfir Town of Springdale Town of Randolph City of YelmGarden Valley School District City of Weston Town of St. George Town of Redmond City of ZillahGenesee Joint School District No. 282 City of Wheeler Town of St. Matthews Town of Rockville Consolidated Borough of Quil Ceda VillageGlenns Ferry Joint School District No. 192 City of Willamina Town of Stuckey Town of Rocky Ridge Grays Harbor Council of GovernmentsGooding Joint School District No. 231 City of Wilsonville Town of Sullivans Island Town of Rush Valley Town of AlmiraGrace Joint School District No. 148 City of Winston Town of Summerton Town of Scipio Town of Beaux Arts VillageHagerman Joint School District No. 233 City of Wood Village Town of Summerville Town of Scofield Town of BucodaHansen School District No. 415 City of Woodburn Town of Summit Town of Sigurd Town of CarbonadoHighland Joint School District No. 305 City of Yachats Town of Surfside Beach Town of Springdale Town of CathlametHomedale School District No. 370 City of Yamhill Town of Swansea Town of Stockton Town of Clyde HillHorseshoe Bend School District No. 73 City of Yoncalla Town of Timmonsville Town of Toquerville Town of ColtonIdaho Falls School District No. 91 Town of Bonanza Town of Trenton Town of Torrey Town of ConconullyIndependent School District of Boise City Town of Butte Falls Town of Turbeville Town of Trenton Town of ConcreteJefferson County School District No. 251 Town of Canyon City Town of Ulmer Town of Tropic Town of Coulee CityJerome Joint School District No. 261 Town of Lakeview Town of Varnville Town of Uintah Town of Coulee DamJoint School District No. 2 Town of Lexington Town of Wagener Town of Vernon Town of CoupevilleAppendix BPage 3 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonKamiah School District No. 304Higher EducationTown of Ward Town of Vineyard Town of CrestonKellogg Joint School District 391 Blue Mountain Community College Town of Ware Shoals Town of Virgin Town of CusickKendrick Joint School District No. 283 Central Oregon Community College Town of West Pelzer Town of Wales Town of DarringtonKimberly School District No. 414 Chemeketa Community College Town of West Union Town of Wallsburg Town of EatonvilleKootenai School District No. 274 Clackamas Community College Town of Whitmire Uintah Basin Association of Governments Town of Elmer CityKuna Joint School District No. 3 Clatsop Community College Town of WilliamstonHigher EducationTown of EndicottLake Pend Oreille School District No. 84 Columbia Gorge Community College Town of Williston College of Eastern Utah Town of FairfieldLakeland School District No. 272 Eastern Oregon University Town of Winnsboro Davis Applied Technology College Town of FarmingtonLapwai School District No. 341 Klamath Community College District Town of Yemassee Dixie Applied Technology College Town of Friday HarborLewiston Independent School District No. 1 Lane Community CollegeHigher EducationDixie State University Town of GarfieldMackay School District No. 182 Linn‐Benton Community College Aiken Technical College Mountainland Applied Technology College Town of HamiltonMadison School District No. 321 Mt. Hood Community College Beaufort Jasper Higher Education Commission Rocky Mountain University of Health Professions Town of HarrahMarsh Valley Joint School District No. 21 Oregon Coast Community College Central Carolina Technical College Salt Lake Community College Town of HattonMarsing Joint School District No. 363 Oregon Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development Clemson University Snow College Town of Hunts PointMcCall‐Donnelly Joint School District No. 421 Oregon Health and Science University Coastal Carolina University Southern Utah University Town of IndexMeadows Valley School District No. 11 Oregon Institute of Technology College of Charleston Tooele Applied Technology College Town of IoneMelba School District No. 136 Oregon State University Denmark Technical College Uintah Basin Applied Technology College Town of La ConnerMiddleton School District No. 134 Oregon State University, Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station Florence‐Darlington Technical College University of Utah Town of LaCrosseMidvale School District No. 433 Oregon University System Francis Marion University University of Utah Hospitals and Clinics Town of LamontMinidoka County School District No. 331 Portland Community College Greenville Technical College Utah State University Town of LatahMoscow School District No. 281 Portland State University Horry‐Georgetown Technical College Utah System of Higher Education Town of LindMountain Home School District No. 193 Reed College Lander University Utah Valley University Town of LymanMountain View School District No. 244 Rogue Community College Medical University of South Carolina Weber State University Town of MaldenMullan School District 392 Southern Oregon University Midlands Technical CollegeEducation (K‐12)Town of MansfieldMurtaugh Joint School District No. 418 Southern Oregon University Family Housing Northeastern Technical College Alpine School District Town of MarcusNampa Christian Schools Inc. Southwestern Oregon Community College Orangeburg‐Calhoun Technical College Beaver County School District Town of MetalineNampa School District No. 131 Tillamook Bay Community College Piedmont Technical College Box Elder School District Town of MillwoodNew Plymouth School District Treasure Valley Community College South Carolina State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education Cache County School District Town of NachesNez Perce Joint School District No. 302 Umpqua Community CollegeSouth Carolina State University Canyons School District Town of NespelemNorth Gem School District No. 149 University of Oregon South Carolina Technical College System Carbon School District Town of NorthportNotus School District Western Oregon University Spartanburg Community College Centro De La Familia De Utah Head Start Program School District Town of OakesdaleOneida County School District No. 351Education (K‐12)Technical College of the Lowcountry Daggett School District Town of OdessaOrofino Joint School District No. 171 Adel School District 21 The Citadel Davis School District Town of Pe EllParma School District No. 137 Adrian School District Tri‐County Technical College Duchesne County School District Town of PrescottPayette School District No. 371 Alsea School District No. 7J Trident Technical College Emery County School District Town of ReardanPlummer‐Worley Joint School District No. 44 Amity School District 4J University of South Carolina Freedom Preparatory Academy School District Town of RiversidePocatello‐Chubbuck School District No. 25 Annex School District 29 University of South Carolina, Aiken Garfield County School District Town of RockfordPost Falls School District No. 273 Arlington School District No. 3 University of South Carolina, Upstate Grand County School District Town of RosaliaPotlatch School District No. 285 Arock School District No. 81 Williamsburg Technical College Granite School District Town of RustonPreston Joint School District No. 201 Ashland School District No. 5 Winthrop University Iron County School District Town of SkykomishRichfield School District No. 316 Ashwood School District York Technical College Jordan School District Town of South Cle ElumRirie Joint School District No. 252 Astoria School District No. 1CEducation (K‐12)Juab School District Town of South PrairieRockland School District No. 382 Athena‐Weston School District No. 29RJ Abbeville County School District Kane County School District Town of SpangleSalmon River Joint School District No. 243 Baker School District No. 5J Aiken County Public Schools Logan City School District Town of SpringdaleSalmon School District No. 291 Bandon School District Allendale County School District Millard School District Town of St. JohnShelley School District No. 60 Banks School District No. 13 Anderson County School Districts 1 and 2 Career and Technology Center Morgan School District Town of SteilacoomShoshone Joint School District No. 312 Beaverton School District No. 48 Anderson School District No. 1 Mountainland Head Start Program School District Office Town of TwispSnake River School District Bend‐La Pine Public Schools Anderson School District No. 2 Murray City School District Town of UniontownSoda Springs Joint School District No. 150 Bethel School District No. 52 Anderson School District No. 3 Nebo School District Town of WashtucnaSouth Lemhi School District No. 292 Blachly School District Anderson School District No. 4 North Sanpete County School District Town of WatervilleSt. Maries Joint School District No. 41 Blachly School District 90 Anderson School District No. 5 North Sanpete School District Town of WaverlySugar‐Salem Joint District No. 322 Brookings Harbor School District Bamberg School District No. 1 North Summit School District Town of WilburSwan Valley Elementary School District No. 33 Camas Valley School District Bamberg School District No. 2 Ogden City School District Town of WilkesonSwan Valley School District No. 92 Canby School District No. 86 Barnwell School District No. 45 Park City School District Town of Wilson CreekTeton County School District No. 401 Cascade School District No. 5 Beaufort County School District Piute County School District Town of WinthropThree Creek Joint School District No. 416 Centennial School District No. 28J Berkeley County School District Provo City School District Town of WoodwayTroy School District No. 287 Central Curry School District No. 1Blackville‐Hilda Public Schools Rich County School District Town of YacoltTwin Falls School District No. 411 Central Linn School District Calhoun County School District Rich School District Town of Yarrow PointValley School District No. 262 Central Point School District No. 6 Charleston County School District Rural Utah Child Development Head Start Program School District OfficeHigher EducationVallivue School District No. 139 Central School District No. 13JCherokee County School District Salt Lake City School District Bates Technical CollegeVision Charter School District # 463 Clackamas Education Service District Chester County School District San Juan School DistrictBellevue Community CollegeWallace School District No. 393 Clatskanie School District No. 6J Chesterfield County School District Sevier School District Bellingham Technical CollegeWeiser School District No. 431 Colton School District No. 53 Clarendon County School District No. 1 South Sanpete School DistrictBig Bend Community CollegeWendell School District No. 232 Columbia Gorge Education Service District Clarendon County School District No. 2 South Summit School District Cascadia Community CollegeWest Bonner County School District No. 83 Condon School District No. 25J Clarendon County School District No. 3 Suu Head Start Program School District Central Washington UniversityWest Jefferson School District No. 253 Coos Bay School District No. 9 Clover School District No. 2 Thomas Edison Charter Schools Centralia CollegeWest Side School District No. 202 Coquille School District No. 8Colleton County School District Tintic School District Clark CollegeWhitepine Joint School District No. 288 Corbett School District No. 39 Darlington County School District Tooele County School District Clover Park Technical CollegeWilder School District No. 133 Corvallis School District No. 509J Delta R‐V School District Uintah School District Columbia Basin Community CollegeSpecial DistrictCove School District No. 15 Dillon County School District No. 1 Wasatch County School District Community Colleges of SpokaneAda County Emergency Medical Services District Crane Elementary School District Dillon County School District No. 2 Washington County School District Eastern Washington UniversityAda County Highway District Creswell School District No. 40 Dillon County School District No. 3 Wayne County School District Edmonds Community CollegeAdams County Recreation District Crook County School District Dillon County School District No. 4 Weber School District Everett Community CollegeAhsahka Water and Sewer District Crow‐Applegate‐Lorane School District No. 66 Diocese Of Charleston SchoolsSpecial DistrictEvergreen State CollegeAlbion Highway District Culver School District No. 4 Dorchester School District No. 2 Ash Creek Special Service District Grays Harbor CollegeAlpine Meadows Water and Sewer District Dallas School District No. 2 Dorchester School District No. 4 Ashley Valley Water and Sewer Improvement District Green River Community CollegeAmerican Falls Free Library District David Douglas School District No. 40 Edgefield County Schools Ballard Water and Sewer Improvement District Highline Community CollegeAmerican Falls Housing Authority Dayton School District No. 8 Fairfield County School District Bear Lake Special Service DistrictLake Washington Institute of TechnologyAtlanta Highway District Dayville School District No. 16J Florence County School District No. 1 Bear River Water Conservancy District Lower Columbia CollegeAvery Water and Sewer District Douglas County School District Florence County School District No. 2 Benchland Water District Northwest Indian CollegeAvondale Irrigation District Douglas County School District No. 4 Florence County School District No. 3 Benson Culinary Water Improvement District Olympic CollegeBayview Water and Sewer District Douglas Education Service District Florence County School District No. 4 Bona Vista Water Improvement District Peninsula CollegeBear Lake County Library District Dufur School District No. 29 Florence County School District No. 5 Cache Mosquito Abatement District Pierce CollegeBench Sewer District Eagle Point School District No. 9 Ft. Mill School District No. 4 Cache Valley Transit District Renton Technical CollegeBenewah County Free Library District Echo School District No. 5 Georgetown County School District Canyonlands Health Care Special Service District Seattle Community Colleges District VIBig Canyon Fire District Elgin School District Greenville County School District Carbon County Housing Authority Shoreline Community CollegeBlaine County Housing Authority Elkton School District No. 34 Greenwood School District No. 50 Carbon County Municipal Building Authority Skagit Valley CollegeBlaine County Recreation District Enterprise School District No. 21 Greenwood School District No. 52 Carbon County Recreation Transportation Special Service District South Puget Sound Community CollegeBliss Fire District Estacada School District No. 108 Hampton County School District No. 2 Carbon Water Conservancy District Tacoma Community CollegeBoise Basin Library District Eugene School District No. 4J Hampton School District No. 1 Castle Valley Special Service District University of WashingtonBoise City/Ada County Housing Authority Falls City School District Horry County Schools Cedar City Housing Authority Walla Walla Community CollegeBoise‐Kung Irrigation District Fern Ridge School District No. 28J Jasper County School District Cedar Mountain Fire Protection District Washington State Board for Community and Technical CollegesBonneville County Fire District No. 1 Forest Grove School District John de la Howe School District Cedarview‐Montwell Special Service District Washington State Higher Education Facilities AuthorityBruneau Valley District Library Fossil School District 21J Kershaw County School District Central Davis County Sewer District Washington State Student Achievement CouncilAppendix BPage 4 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonBruneau Water and Sewer District Gaston School District 511 J Lancaster County School District Central Iron County Water Conservancy District Washington State UniversityBuhl Highway District Gervais School District Laurens County School District No. 55 Central Utah Water Conservancy District Washington State University, VancouverBuhl Rural Fire Protection District Gladstone School District Laurens County School District No. 56 Central Weber Sewer Improvement District Wenatchee Valley CollegeBurley Highway District Glendale School District No. 77 Lee County School District Charleston Water Conservancy District Western Washington UniversityCaldwell Housing Authority Glide School District Legacy Charter Schools Copperton Improvement District Whatcom Community CollegeCanyon Highway District No. 4 Grant County Education Service District Lexington County School District No. 1 Cottonwood Improvement District Yakima Valley Community CollegeCascade Rural Fire District Grant School District No. 3 Lexington County School District No. 2 Davis Community Housing AuthorityEducation (K‐12)Castleford Rural Fire District Grants Pass School District No. 7Lexington County School District No. 3 Davis County Housing Authority Aberdeen School District No. 5Central Fire District Greater Albany Public School District 8J Lexington County School District No. 4 Davis‐Salt Lake Aerial Spray Authority Adna School District No. 226Central Orchards Sewer District Gresham‐Barlow School District Lexington‐Richland Counties School District No. 5 Duchesne County Upper Country Water Improvement District Almira School District No. 17Central Shoshone County Water District Harney County School District No. 3 Marion County School District Duchesne County Water Conservancy District Anacortes School District No. 103Clark County District Library Harney Education Service District Marion County School District No. 7 Emery County Housing Authority Arlington Public SchoolsClarkia Free Library District Harper School District No. 66 Marlboro County School District Emery County Municipal Building Authority Asotin‐Anatone School DistrictClarkia Highway District Harrisburg School District No. 7 McCormick County School District Emery County Special Service District No. 1 Auburn School District No. 408Clearwater Free Library District Helix School District No. 1‐R Newberry County School District Emery Water Conservancy District Bainbridge Island School District No. 303Clearwater Highway District Hermiston School District Oconee County School District Emigration Improvement District Battle Ground School District No. 119Clearwater Soil and Water Conservation District High Desert Education Service District Orangeburg Consolidated School District Four Fruitland Special Service District Bellevue Christian School DistrictClearwater Water District Hillsboro School District No. 1J Orangeburg County Consolidated School District No. 3 Garden City Fire District Bellevue School District No. 405Consolidated Free Library District Hood River County School District Orangeburg County Consolidated School District No. 5 Grand County Housing Authority Bellingham School District No. 501Cottonwood Highway District Huntington School District No. 16J Pickens County School District Granger‐Hunter Improvement DistrictBenge School District No. 122Custer Soil and Water Conservation District Imbler School District No. 11 Richland County School District No. 1 Heber Valley Special Service District Bethel School District No. 403Dietrich Fire District InterMountain Education Service District Richland County School District No. 2 Hooper Water Improvement District Bickleton School DistrictDietrich Highway District Ione School District R2 Rock Hill School District No. 3 Jensen Water Improvement District Blaine School District No. 503Doumecq Highway District Jackson County School District No. 9 Saluda School District No. 1 Johnson Water Improvement District Boistfort School District No. 234Downey Swan Lake Highway District Jackson Education Service District South Carolina Public Charter School District Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District Bremerton School DistrictDry Creek Cemetery Maintenance District Jefferson County School District No. 509‐J Spartanburg County School District No. 1 Jordanelle Special Service District Brewster School District No. 111Eagle Fire Protection District Jefferson School District Spartanburg County School District No. 2 Juab Special Service Fire District Bridgeport School District No. 75Eagle Sewer District Jewell School District No. 8 Spartanburg County School District No. 3 Kane County Water Conservancy DistrictBrinnon School District No. 46East Bonner County Free Library District John Day School District No. 3 Spartanburg County School District No. 4 Kearns Improvement District Burlington‐Edison School District No. 100East Bonner County Library District Jordan Valley School District No. 3 Spartanburg County School District No. 5 Lake Point Improvement District Camas School DistrictEast Greenacres Irrigation District Joseph School District No. 6Spartanburg County School District No. 6 Logan‐Cache Airport Authority Cape Flattery School District No. 401Eastern Idaho Public Health District Junction City School District No. 69 Spartanburg County School District No. 7 Maeser Water and Sewer Improvement District Capital Region Educational Service District No. 113Eastern Idaho Regional Wastewater Authority Klamath County School District Sumter School District Magna Mosquito Abatement District Carbonado Historical School District No. 19Elk River Free Library District Klamath Falls City Schools Sumter School District No. 17 Magna Water District Cascade Christian SchoolsElmore Soil and Water Conservation District Knappa School District Sumter School District No. 2 Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake and Sandy Cascade School District No. 228Fenn Highway District La Grande School District No. 1 Union County School District Midvalley Improvement District Cashmere School District No. 222Ferdinand Highway District Lake County School District No. 7 Ware Shoals School District No. 51 Midway Sanitation District Castle Rock School District No. 401Fish Haven Mosquito Abatement District Lake Ed Service District Williamsburg County Schools Milford Area Healthcare Service District Central Kitsap School District No. 401Fremont County District Library Lake Oswego School District No. 7J Williston School District No. 29 Moab Mosquito Abatement District Central Valley School District No. 356Friedman Memorial Airport Authority Lakeview School District No. 7 York School District No. 1 Moab Valley Fire Protection District Centralia School District No. 401Garden Valley District Library Lane Education Service DistrictSpecial DistrictMountain Green Sewer Improvement District Chehalis School District No. 302Garden Valley Fire Protection District Lebanon Community School District No. 9 Abbeville Housing Authority Mountain Regional Water Special Service District Cheney School District No. 360Garden Valley Recreation District Lincoln County School DistrictAiken Housing Authority Mountain View Special Service District Chewelah School District No. 36Gateway Fire Protection District Linn‐Benton‐Lincoln Education Service District Anderson Housing Authority Mt. Olympus Improvement District Chief Leschi School SystemGem County Fire Protection District Long Creek School District No. 17 Atlantic Beach Housing Authority North Davis County Sewer District Chimacum School District No. 49Gem County Mosquito Abatement District Lowell School District No. 71 Beaufort Housing Authority North Davis Fire District Clarkston School District No. J250‐185Glenns Ferry Highway District Mapleton School District No. 32 Beaufort‐Jasper Water and Sewer Authority North Emery Water Users Special Service District Cle Elum‐Roslyn School DistrictGolden Gate Highway District No. 3 Marcola School District No. 79J Beech Island Rural Community Water District North Fork Special Services District Clover Park School District No. 400Gooding County Memorial Hospital District McKenzie School District Belton‐Honea Path Water Authority North Pointe Solid Waste Special Service District Colfax School District No. 300Grace District Library McMinnville School District No. 40 Bennettsville Housing Authority North Summit Fire District College Place School District No. 250Grangeville Highway District Medford School District No. 549C Berea Public Service District North Tooele County Fire Protection District Colton School District No. 306Granite Reeder Water and Sewer District Milton‐Freewater School District No. 7 Berkeley County Water and Sanitation Authority North Utah Water Conservancy District Columbia School District No. 206Greater Boise Auditorium District Mitchell School District No. 55 Big Creek Water and Sewerage District North View Fire District Columbia School District No. 206, Stevens CountyGreater Middleton Parks and Recreation District Molalla River School District Bluffton Township Fire District Ogden Housing Authority Columbia School District No. 400Greater Swan Valley Fire Protection District No. 2 Monument School District Boiling Springs Fire District, Greenville County Ouray Park Water Improvement District Colville School District No. 115Groveland Water and Sewer District Morrow County School DistrictBroad Creek Public Service District Park City Fire Service District Concrete School District No. 11Harbor View Estates Water and Sewer District Mt. Angel School District Buffalo‐Mt. Pisgah Fire Protection District Price River Water Improvement District Conway Consolidated School District No. 317Hayden Lake Irrigation District Multnomah Education Service District Consortium Burton Fire District Provo Housing Authority Cosmopolis School DistrictHayden Lake Recreational Water and Sewer District Myrtle Point School District Central Midlands Regional Transit Authority Rockville/Springdale Fire Protection District Coulee‐Hartline School District No. 151Hillsdale Highway District Neah‐Kah‐Nie School District No. 56 Charleston Area Regional Transportation Authority Roosevelt City Housing Authority Coupeville School District No. 204Homedale Highway District Nestucca Valley School District No. 101 Charleston County Aviation Authority Salt Lake City Housing Authority Crescent School DistrictHoo Doo Water and Sewer District New Hope Christian Schools Charleston County Housing and Redevelopment Authority Salt Lake City Mosquito Abatement District Creston School District No. 73Horseshoe Bend Fire Protection District Newberg School District No. 29J Charleston Housing Authority Salt Lake County Housing Authority Curlew School District No‐ 50Idaho Soil and Water Conservation District North Bend School District No. 13 Charleston Naval Complex Redevelopment Authority Sandy Suburban Improvement District Cusick School DistrictIndian Valley Rural Fire District North Central Education Service District Charleston Soil and Water Conservation District Scofield Reservoir Special Service District Darrington School District No. 330Iona‐Bonneville Sewer District North Clackamas School District No. 12 Cheraw Housing Authority Sevier County Special Service District No. 1 Davenport School District No. 207Island Park Fire District North Douglas School District No. 22 Chester Housing Authority Skyline Mountain Special Service District Dayton School District No. 2Jerome Highway District North Lake School District Chester Metropolitan District Snyderville Basin Special Recreation District Deer Park School District No. 414Jerome Recreation District North Marion School District No. 15 Chester Sewer District Snyderville Basin Water Reclamation District Dieringer School DistrictJerome Rural Fire District No. 1 North Santiam School District No. 29 Coast Regional Transportation Authority Solid Waste Special Service District No. 1 Dixie School DistrictKamiah Fire Protection District North Wasco County School District No. 21 Columbia Housing Authority South Davis Sewer District East Valley School District No. 361Kamiah Highway District Northwest Regional Education Service District Conway Housing Authority South Davis Water District East Valley School District No. 361, Spokane CountyKetchum Rural Fire Protection District Nyssa School District No. 26 Daniel Morgan Water District South Ogden Conservation District East Valley School District No. 90, Yakima CountyKidder Harris Highway District Oakland School District Darlington County Fire District South Salt Lake Valley Mosquito Abatement District Eastmont School District No. 206Kingston Water District Oakridge School District No. 76 Darlington County Water and Sewer Authority South Summit Fire Protection District Eatonville School District No. 404Kootenai County Water District No. 1 Ontario School District No. 8C Darlington Housing Authority South Utah Valley Solid Waste District Edmonds School District No. 15Kootenai Ponderay Sewer District Oregon City School District No. 62 Donalds‐Due West Water and Sewer Authority South Valley Sewer District Educational Service District No. 112Kootenai‐Shoshone Soil and Water Conservation District Oregon Trail School District No. 46 Dorchester County Sales Tax Transportation Authority Southeastern Utah Housing Authority Ellensburg School District No. 401Kuna Library District Paisley School District No. 11 Dorchester County Water Authority Spanish Valley Water and Sewer Improvement District Elma School District No. 68Laclede Water District Parkrose School District No. 3 Duncan Chapel Fire District St. George Housing Authority Endicott School District No. 308Lakes Highway District Pendleton School District No. 16 Easley Housing Authority Stansbury Park Improvement District Entiat School District No. 127Latah County Library District Perrydale School District No. 21J Easley‐Central Water District Strawberry Electric Service District Enumclaw School District No. 216Latah Soil and Water Conservation District Philomath School District No. 17J East Richland County Public Service District Sugar House Park Authority Ephrata School District No. 165Lemhi Soil and Water Conservation District Phoenix‐Talent School District Edgefield County Water and Sewer Authority Tabby Valley Park Special Service District Evaline School District No. 36Lewiston Orchards Irrigation District Pilot Rock School District No. 2 Florence Housing Authority Taylorsville‐Bennion Improvement District Everett School District No. 2Lewiston‐Nez Perce County Regional Airport Authority Pine Eagle School District No. 61 Fort Mill Housing Authority Thompson Special Service District Evergreen School District No. 114, Clark CountyLincoln County Recreation District Pinehurst School District Fripp Island Public Service District Timpanogos Special Service District Evergreen School District No. 205Little Blacktail Ranch Water District Pleasant Hill School District Gaffney Housing Authority Tooele County Housing Authority Federal Way Public SchoolsLittle Wood River Library District Plush School District 18 Gaston Rural Community Water District Tooele County Recreation Special Service District Ferndale School District No. 502Lizard Butte Library District Port Orford‐Langlois School District No. 2CJ Georgetown County Water and Sewer District Tridell‐Lapoint Water Improvement District Fife School District No. 417Lost River Highway District Portland Public School District No. 1 Georgetown Housing Authority Uintah Animal Control and Shelter Special Service District Finley School DistrictM&T Water and Sewer District Powers School District No. 31 Gilbert‐Summit Rural Water District Uintah County Municipal Building Authority Franklin Pierce School District No. 402Mackay Free Library District Prairie City School District No. 4 Grand Strand Water and Sewer Authority Uintah Fire Suppression Special Service District Freeman School District No. 358Madison Library District Prospect School District Greenville Arena District Uintah Health Care Special Service District Garfield School District No. 302Appendix BPage 5 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonMarsing Rural Fire District Rainier School District No. 13 Greenville County Recreation District Uintah Highlands Water and Sewer Improvement District Glenwood School DistrictMcCall Fire Protection District Redmond School District No. 2J Greenville County Redevelopment Authority Uintah Mosquito Abatement District Goldendale School DistrictMcCall Memorial Hospital District Reedsport School District No. 105 Greenville Housing Authority Uintah Recreation District Grand Coulee Dam School DistrictMeridian Cemetery Maintenance District Region 9 Education Service District Greenville Transit Authority Uintah Transportation Special Service District Grandview School District No. 200Meridian Library District Reynolds School District No. 7 Greenwood Metropolitan District Uintah Water Conservancy District Granger School District No. 204Meridian Rural Fire Protection District Riddle School District No. 70 Greer Housing Authority Unified Fire Authority Granite Falls School District No. 332Mica Kidd Island Fire Protection District Riverdale School District No. 51J Hartsville Housing Authority Utah County Housing Authority Grapeview School District No. 54Middleton Rural Fire District Rogue River School District No. 35Hilton Head No. 1 Public Service District Utah Paiute Housing Authority Great Northern School DistrictMidvale Fire Protection District Roseburg Public Schools Holly Springs Fire‐Rescue District Utah Transit Authority Green Mountain School District No. 103Minidoka County Fire Protection District Salem‐Keizer Public School District No. 24J Homeland Park Water and Sewer District Utah Valley Dispatch Special Service District Griffin School District No. 324Minidoka County Highway District Santiam Canyon School District No. 129J James Island Public Service District Wasatch County Fire District Harrington Public SchoolsMoreland Water and Sewer District Santiam Christian Schools Kingstree Housing Authority Wasatch Front Waste and Recycling District Highland School District No. 203Mountain Home Highway District Scappoose School District No. 1J Lady's Island‐St. Helena Fire District Wasatch Integrated Waste Management District Highline School District No. 401Mountain Rides Transportation Authority Scio School District No. 95C Lake City Housing Authority Washington County Water Conservancy District Hockinson School DistrictNampa and Meridian Irrigation District Seaside School District Lancaster County Water and Sewer District Waste Management Service District No. 5 Hood Canal School District No. 404Nampa Highway District No. 1 Sheridan School District No. 48J Lancaster Housing Authority Weber Basin Water Conservancy District Hoquiam School District No. 28Nampa Housing Authority Sherman County School District Lancaster Soil and Water Conservation District Weber Fire District Inchelium School District No. 70New Plymouth Fire District Sherwood School District No. 88J Laurens Housing Authority Weber Mosquito Abatement District Issaquah School District No. 411North Bingham County District Library Silver Falls School District No. 4J Lexington County Health Services District, Inc. Weber‐Box Elder Conservation District Kahlotus School District No. 56North Custer Hospital District Sisters School District No. 6 Liberty‐Chesnee‐Fingerville Water District Wellsville‐Mendon Conservancy District Kalama School District No. 402North Kootenai Water and Sewer District Siuslaw School District No. 97J Local Housing Authority White City Water Improvement District Keller School District No. 3North Lake Recreational Sewer and Water District South Coast Education Service District, Region No. 7 Lowcountry Regional Transportation Authority Woodruff Fire District Kelso School District No. 458North Latah County Highway District South Lane School District No. 45J3 Lugoff‐Elgin Water AuthorityStateKennewick School District No. 17Northern Lakes Fire District South Umpqua School District No. 19Marion Housing Authority State Of Utah Kent School District No. 415Northside Fire District South Wasco County School District No. 1Marlboro County Housing Authority Utah Department of Administrative Services Kettle Falls School District No. 212Notus‐Parma Highway District No. 2 Southern Oregon Education Service District McColl Housing Authority Utah Department of Health Kiona‐Benton City School District No. 52Oakley Highway District Spray School District No. 1 Medical University Hospital Authority Utah State Legislature Kittitas School DistrictOakley Library District Springfield School District No. 19 Metropolitan Sewer Sub‐District Utah State Treasurer Klickitat School District No. 402Ola District Library St. Helens School District No. 502 Mitford Water and Sewer DistrictTribalLa Center School DistrictOneida County Fire District St. Paul School District No. 45 Mullins Housing Authority Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Reservation La Conner School District No. 311Oregon Trail Recreation District Stanfield School District No. 61 Murrells Inlet‐Garden City Fire District Kanosh Band of the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah LaCrosse School DistrictOutlet Bay Water and Sewer District Sutherlin School District No. 130 Myrtle Beach Air Force Base Redevelopment Authority Koosharem Band of the Paiute Indian Tribe Lake Chelan School District No. 129Panhandle Health District Sweet Home School District No. 55 Myrtle Beach Housing Authority Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation Lake Quinault School District No. 97Parma Rural Fire Protection District Three Rivers School District Newberry County Water and Sewer Authority Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation Housing Authority Lake Stevens School District No. 4Pine Ridge Water and Sewer District Tigard‐Tualatin School District No. 23J Newberry Housing Authority Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah Lake Washington School District No. 414Pinehurst Water District Tillamook School District No. 9 North Charleston Housing Authority Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians Lakewood School District No. 306Pioneer Irrigation District Ukiah School District 80 R North Charleston Sewer District Ute Indian Tribe Lamont School DistrictPlacerville Fire Protection District Umatilla School District No. 6 North Greenville Fire DistrictLiberty School District No. 362Pocatello Housing Authority Union School District 5 Oconee County Joint Regional Sewer AuthorityLind School DistrictPocatello‐Chubbuck Auditorium District Vale School District No. 84 Parker Sewer and Fire SubdistrictLongview School District No. 122Portneuf District Library Vernonia School District No. 47J Patriots Point Development AuthorityLoon Lake School District No. 183Post Falls Highway District Wallowa School District No. 12 Pee Dee Regional Airport DistrictLopez Island School District No. 144Power County Highway District Warrenton‐Hammond School District No. 30 Pee Dee Regional Transportation AuthorityLyle School District No‐ 406Prairie Highway District West Linn‐Wilsonville School District Piedmont Public Service DistrictLynden School District No. 504Prairie‐River Library District Willamette Education Service District Pioneer Rural Water DistrictMabton School District No. 120Progressive Irrigation District Willamina School District No. 30J Powdersville Water DistrictMansfield School District No. 207Raft River Highway District Winston‐Dillard School District No. 116 Richland‐Lexington Airport DistrictManson School DistrictRapid River Water and Sewer District Woodburn School District No. 103 Richland‐Lexington Riverbanks Park DistrictMary M. Knight School DistrictRichfield District Library Yamhill‐Carlton School District No. 1Rock Hill Housing AuthorityMary Walker School District No. 207Riverside Independent Water District Yoncalla School District No. 32 Saluda County Water and Sewer AuthorityMarysville School District No. 25Rock Creek Fire DistrictSpecial DistrictSandy Springs Water DistrictMcCleary School District No. 65Rockland Rural Fire District Adair Rural Fire Protection District Santee Fire Service DistrictMead School District No. 354Rogerson Water District Amity Fire District Santee Wateree Regional Transportation AuthorityMedical Lake School District No. 326Ross Point Water District Applegate Valley Fire District No. 9 Sheldon Township Fire DistrictMercer Island School District No. 400Sagle Fire District Arch Cape Sanitary District Slater‐Marietta Fire DistrictMeridian School District No. 505Salmon River Clinic Hospital District Arch Cape Water District South Carolina Housing Authority Bond CouncilMethow Valley School DistrictSam Owen Fire District Arnold Irrigation District South Carolina Public Employee Benefit AuthorityMonroe School District No. 103Santa‐Fernwood Water and Sewer District Aumsville Rural Fire District South Carolina Regional Housing Authority No. 1Montesano School District No. 66Schweitzer Fire‐Rescue District Baker County Library District South Carolina Regional Housing Authority No. 3Morton School District No. 214Settlers Irrigation District Baker Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina State Education Assistance AuthorityMoses Lake School District No. 161Shelley/Firth Fire District Baker Valley Soil and Water Conservation District South Carolina State Fiscal Accountability AuthorityMossyrock School District No. 206Shoshone City & Rural Fire District Bandon Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina State Housing Finance and Development AuthorityMt. Adams School District No. 209Shoshone County Fire Protection District No. 2 Barlow Water Improvement District South Carolina State Ports AuthorityMt. Baker School District No. 507Shoshone Highway District No. 2 Bay Area Hospital District South Greenville Fire DistrictMt. Vernon School District No. 320South Bannock Library District Bend Parks and Recreation District South Island Public Service DistrictMukilteo School District No. 6South Bingham Soil Conservation District Beverly Beach Water District Southside Rural Community Water DistrictNaches Valley School District No. 3South Boundary Fire Protection District Black Butte Ranch Rural Fire Protection District Spartanburg Housing AuthorityNapavine School District No. 14South Custer Fire District Blue Mountain Hospital District Spartanburg Regional Health Services DistrictNaselle‐Grays River Valley School District No.165South Fork Coeur d'Alene River Sewer District Blue River Water District St. Andrews Public Service District South CarolinaNespelem School District No. 14South Latah Highway District Boardman Park and Recreation District St. John's Fire DistrictNewport School District No. 56‐415Southside Water and Sewer District Boardman Rural Fire Protection District Starr‐Iva Water and Sewer DistrictNine Mile Falls School District No. 325/179Southwestern Idaho Cooperative Housing Authority Boring Water District No. 24 Startex‐Jackson‐Wellford‐Duncan Water DistrictNooksack Valley School District No. 506St. Maries Fire Protection District Boulder Creek Retreat Special Road District Sumter Housing AuthorityNorth Beach School District No. 64Star Joint Fire District Brownsville Rural Fire District Talatha Rural Community Water DistrictNorth Franklin School District No. 51Star Sewer and Water District Buell‐Red Prairie Water District Taylors Fire and Sewer DistrictNorth Kitsap School District No. 400Sun Valley Water and Sewer District Bunker Hill Sanitary District Three Rivers Solid Waste AuthorityNorth Mason School DistrictSunset Heights Water District Burlington Water District Tigerville Fire DistrictNorth Thurston Public SchoolsTarghee Regional Public Transit Authority Camellia Park Sanitary District Tri‐County Solid Waste AuthorityNorthport School District No. 211Targhee Regional Public Transportation Authority Cannon Beach Rural Fire Protection District Union Housing AuthorityNorthshore School District No. 417Teton County Fire Protection District Central Lincoln People's Utility District Valley Public Service AuthorityOak Harbor School District No. 201Three Creek Highway District Central Oregon Irrigation District Waccamaw Regional Transportation AuthorityOakesdale School District No. 324Three Mile Water District Central Oregon Park and Recreation District Wedgefield Stateburg Water DistrictOakville School District No. 400Timberlake Fire Protection District Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority West Anderson Water DistrictOcean Beach School District No. 101Twin Falls Highway District Charleston Fire District Westview‐Fairforest Fire DistrictOcosta School District No. 172Twin Falls Housing Authority Charleston Sanitary District Whitney Fire Protection DistrictOdessa School District No. 105Twin Falls Rural Fire Protection District Chehalem Park and Recreation District Williamsburg County Transit AuthorityOkanogan School District No. 105Twin Ridge Rural Fire District Chenowith Water Public Utility District Williamsburg County Water and Sewer AuthorityOlympia School District No. 111Union Independent Highway District Chiloquin‐Agency Lake Rural Fire Protection District Woodruff Housing AuthorityOlympic Educational Service DistrictUpper Fords Creek Rural Fire District Christmas Valley Domestic Water Supply District Woodruff‐Roebuck Water DistrictOmak School District No. 19Warm Lake Recreational Water District Christmas Valley Park and Recreation District York County Natural Gas AuthorityOnalaska School District No. 300Wendell Highway District Clackamas County Fire District No. 1StateOnion Creek School District No. 30West Boise Sewer District Clackamas County Housing Authority Santee‐Lynches Regional Council of GovernmentsOrcas Island School District No. 137West Bonner Library District Clackamas County Soil and Water Conservation District South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental ControlOrchard Prairie School District No. 123West Bonner Water and Sewer District Clatskanie Park and Recreation District South Carolina Department of Mental HealthOrient School District No. 65Appendix BPage 6 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonWest Pend Oreille Fire District Clatskanie People's Utility District South Carolina Department of RevenueOroville School District No. 410Western Ada Recreation District Clatskanie Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina General Services DivisionOrting School District No. 344Western Elmore County Recreation District Clatsop Care Center Health District South Carolina Office of Regulatory StaffOthello School DistrictWilder Irrigation District Clatsop County Housing Authority South Carolina State Budget and Control BoardPalisades School District No. 102Wilder Public Library District Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina State Treasurer's OfficePalouse School District No. 301Wilder Rural Fire Protection District Coburg Rural Fire Protection District State Of South CarolinaPasco School District No. 1Wilderness Ranch Fire Protection District Colton Fire DistrictTownship Pateros School DistrictWinona Highway District Colton Water District Township of Grand MeadowPaterson School District No. 50Worley Fire District Columbia Corridor Drainage Districts Joint Contracting AuthorityTribalPe Ell School District No. 301Worley Highway District Columbia Health District Catawba Indian NationPeninsula School DistrictStateColumbia Improvement DistrictPioneer School District No. 402Idaho Department of Administration Columbia River People's Utility DistrictPomeroy School District No. 110Idaho Department of Health and Welfare Columbia Soil and Water Conservation DistrictPort Angeles School District No. 121State Of Idaho Coos County Airport DistrictPort Townsend School District No. 50TribalCoos County Library Service DistrictPrescott School District No. 402‐37Coeur d'Alene Tribe Coquille Indian Housing AuthorityPride Prep SchoolsKootenai Tribe of Idaho Coquille Valley Hospital DistrictProsser School District No. 116Nez Perce Tribal Enterprises Corbett Water DistrictPuget Sound Educational Service DistrictNez Perce Tribe Corvallis Rural Fire Protection DistrictPullman School District No. 267Shoshone‐Bannock Tribes Cove Rural Fire Protection DistrictPuyallup School District No. 3Crooked River Ranch Rural Fire Protection DistrictQueets‐Clearwater School District No. 20Crooked River Ranch Special Road DistrictQuilcene School District No. 48Curry Health DistrictQuillayute Valley School District No. 402Curry Public Library DistrictQuincy School District No. 144Dallas Cemetery District No. 4Rainier School District No. 307Dean Minard Water DistrictRaymond School District No. 116Dee Rural Fire Protection DistrictReardan‐Edwall School DistrictDeschutes County 911 Service DistrictRenton School District No. 403Deschutes County Rural Fire District No. 1Republic School DistrictDeschutes Valley Water DistrictRichland School District No. 400Devils Lake Water Improvement DistrictRidgefield School District No. 122Dexter Rural Fire Protection DistrictRitzville School DistrictDouglas County Fire District No. 2Riverside School DistrictDouglas County Housing AuthorityRiverview School District No. 407Douglas Soil and Water Conservation DistrictRochester School DistrictDrakes Crossing Rural Fire Protection DistrictRosalia School District No. 320Dufur Recreation DistrictRoyal School DistrictEagle Valley Soil and Water Conservation DistrictSan Juan Island School District No. 149East Fork Irrigation DistrictSatsop School District No. 104East Multnomah Soil and Water Conservation DistrictSeattle Public SchoolsEast Umatilla County Health DistrictSedro‐Woolley School District No. 101East Valley Water DistrictSelah School District No. 119Echo Rural Fire DistrictSelkirk School District No. 70Elsie‐Vinemaple Rural Fire Protection District No. 11Sequim School District No. 323Emerald People's Utility DistrictShaw Island School District No. 10Estacada Rural Fire District No. 69Shelton School District No. 309Fairview Water DistrictShoreline School District No. 412Falcon Cove Beach Water DistrictSkykomish School DistrictFarmers Irrigation DistrictSnohomish School District No. 201Gardiner Sanitary DistrictSnoqualmie Valley School District No. 410Gaston Rural Fire DistrictSoap Lake School District No. 156Gates Rural Fire Protection DistrictSouth Bend School District No. 118Gearhart Rural Fire Protection DistrictSouth Kitsap School District No. 402Glendale Rural Fire Protection DistrictSouth Whidbey School District No. 206Gleneden Sanitary DistrictSouthside School DistrictGoshen Fire DistrictSpokane Public SchoolsGovernment Camp Sanitary DistrictSprague School DistrictGrand Ronde Sanitary DistrictSt. John School District No. 322Grant County Transportation DistrictStanwood‐Camano School District No. 401Grant Soil and Water Conservation DistrictSteilacoom Historical School District No. 1Grants Pass Irrigation DistrictSteptoe School District No. 304Green Sanitary DistrictStevenson‐Carson School District No. 303Hahlen Road Special DistrictSultan School District No. 311Halsey‐Shedd Rural Fire Protection DistrictSummit Valley School District 202Hamlet Rural Fire Protection DistrictSumner School District No. 320Harbor Sanitary DistrictSunnyside School District No. 201Harbor Water Public Utility DistrictTacoma School District No. 10Harney District HospitalTaholah School District No. 77Harney Soil and Water Conservation DistrictTahoma School District No. 409Harriman Rural Fire Protection DistrictTekoa School District No. 265Hazeldell Rural Fire Protection DistrictTenino School District No. 402Hebo Joint Water and Sewer AuthorityThorp School District No. 400Heceta Water DistrictToledo School District No. 237Hermiston Cemetery DistrictTonasket School DistrictHermiston Fire and Emergency Services DistrictToppenish School District No. 202Hermiston Irrigation DistrictTouchet School District No. 300Hood River County Library DistrictToutle Lake School District No. 130Hood River County Transportation DistrictTrout Lake School District No. R‐400Hood River Valley Parks and Recreation DistrictTukwila School District No. 406Hoodland Fire District No. 74Tumwater School District No. 33Hubbard Rural Fire Protection DistrictUnion Gap School District No. 2Ice Fountain Water DistrictUniversity Place School District No. 83Illinois Valley Rural Fire Protection DistrictValley School DistrictIone Rural Fire Protection DistrictValley School District No. 70Irrigon Community Park and Recreation Maintenance DistrictVancouver School District No. 37Jackson County Airport AuthorityVashon Island School District No. 402Jackson County Fire District No. 3Wahkiakum School District No. 200Jackson County Fire District No. 5Wahluke School District No. 73Jackson County Housing AuthorityWaitsburg School DistrictJackson County Library DistrictWalla Walla School District No. 140Jackson County Vector Control DistrictWapato School District No. 207Jackson Soil and Water Conservation DistrictWarden School District No. 146‐161Jefferson Rural Fire Protection DistrictWashington Schools Risk Management PoolJohn Day/Canyon City Parks and Recreation DistrictWashington State Educational Service DistrictAppendix BPage 7 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonJunction City Rural Fire Protection DistrictWashougal School DistrictJuniper Flat Rural Fire Protection DistrictWashtucna School DistrictKeating Soil and Water Conservation DistrictWaterville School District No. 209Keizer Rural Fire Protection DistrictWellpinit School DistrictKeno Fire Protection DistrictWenatchee School District No. 246Kernville‐Gleneden Beach‐Lincoln Beach Water DistrictWest Valley School District No. 208, Yakima CountyKlamath County Fire District No. 1West Valley School District No. 363, Spokane CountyKlamath County Library Service DistrictWhite Pass School District No. 303Klamath Housing AuthorityWhite River School District No. 416Klamath Irrigation DistrictWhite Salmon Valley School District No. 405‐17Klamath Vector Control DistrictWilbur School District No. 200La Grande Rural Fire Protection DistrictWillapa Valley School District No. 160La Pine Park and Recreation DistrictWilson Creek School DistrictLa Pine Rural Fire Protection DistrictWinlock School District No. 232La Pine Water DistrictWishkah Valley School District No. 117Lake District HospitalWoodland School District No. 404Lake Grove Water DistrictYakima School District No. 7Lakeside Fire District No. 4Yelm Community School District No. 2Lane County Fire District No. 1Zillah School District No. 205Lane Library DistrictSpecial DistrictLane Transit DistrictAcme Water District No. 18Langlois Water DistrictAdams County Fire Protection District No. 1LaPine Special Sewer DistrictAdams County Mosquito Control DistrictLebanon Aquatic DistrictAeneas Lake Irrigation DistrictLebanon Fire DistrictAlderwood Water and Wastewater DistrictLewis and Clark Rural Fire Protection DistrictAlpine Water DistrictLibby Drainage DistrictAnacortes Housing AuthorityLinn Benton Housing AuthorityAnnapolis Water DistrictLookingglass Rural Fire DistrictAsotin County Cemetery District No. 1Lorane Rural Fire Protection DistrictAsotin County Conservation DistrictLowell Rural Fire Protection DistrictAsotin County Fire District No. 1Lower Umpqua Hospital DistrictAsotin County Housing AuthorityLusted Water DistrictAsotin County Public Utility District No. 1Madras Aquatic Center DistrictBadger Mountain Irrigation DistrictMalheur County Housing AuthorityBainbridge Island Metropolitan Park and Recreation DistrictMalin Rural Fire Protection DistrictBasin City Water/Sewer DistrictMapleton Water DistrictBayview Beach Water DistrictMarion County Fire District No. 1Beacon Hill Water and Sewer DistrictMarion Soil and Water Conservation DistrictBeehive Irrigation DistrictMedford Irrigation DistrictBelfair Water District No. 1Merrill Rural Fire Protection DistrictBellevue Convention Center AuthorityMetroBellingham Housing AuthorityMcMinnville Water & LightBellingham Public Development AuthorityMid‐County Cemetery Maintenance DistrictBenton County Diking District No. 1Middle Fork Irrigation DistrictBenton County Fire Protection District No. 1Miles Crossing Sanitary Sewer DistrictBenton County Fire Protection District No. 2Mill City Rural Fire Protection DistrictBenton County Fire Protection District No. 4Milton‐Freewater Water Control DistrictBenton County Fire Protection District No. 5Mist‐Birkenfeld Rural Fire Protection DistrictBenton County Fire Protection District No. 6Mohawk Valley Rural Fire DistrictBenton County Mosquito Control DistrictMolalla River Improvement DistrictBenton County Public Utility District No. 1Molalla Rural Fire Protection District No. 73Benton Irrigation DistrictMonroe Rural Fire Protection DistrictBenton‐Franklin Health DistrictMorrow County Health DistrictBeverly Water DistrictMountain View Hospital DistrictBirch Bay Water and Sewer DistrictMt. Angel Fire DistrictBlack Diamond Water DistrictMultnomah County Drainage District No. 1Bremerton Housing AuthorityMultnomah County Rural Fire Protection District No. 10Buckhannon‐Upshur County Airport AuthorityMultnomah County Rural Fire Protection District No. 14Burbank Irrigation District No. 4Nesika Beach‐Ophir Water DistrictCarnhope Irrigation District No 7Neskowin Regional Sanitary AuthorityCascadia Conservation DistrictNeskowin Regional Water DistrictCedar River Water and Sewer DistrictNestucca Rural Fire Protection DistrictCentral Klickitat County Park and Recreation DistrictNetarts Oceanside Sanitary DistrictCentral Pierce Fire and Rescue District No. 6Netarts‐Oceanside Rural Fire Protection DistrictCentral Puget Sound Regional Transit AuthorityNorth Bay Rural Protection Fire DistrictCentral Valley Ambulance AuthorityNorth Bend City/Coos‐Curry Housing AuthorityChelan County Fire District No. 1North Central Public Health DistrictChelan County Fire District No. 3North Clackamas Parks and Recreation DistrictChelan County Fire District No. 5North County Recreation DistrictChelan County Fire District No. 6North Gilliam Cemetery DistrictChelan County Fire District No. 7North Gilliam County Rural Fire Protection DistrictChelan County Fire District No. 8North Lincoln Fire and Rescue District No. 1Chelan County Fire District No. 9North Powder Rural Fire Protection DistrictChelan County Public Hospital District No. 1North Sherman County Rural Fire Protection DistrictChelan County Public Utility District No. 1North Unit Irrigation DistrictChelan County/Wenatchee Housing AuthorityNortheast Oregon Housing AuthorityChelan‐Douglas Health DistrictNorthern Wasco County Park and Recreation DistrictChinook Water DistrictNorthern Wasco County People's Utility DistrictChuckanut Community Forest Park DistrictNorthwest Oregon Housing AuthorityClallam Conservation DistrictNyssa Road Assessment District No. 2Clallam County Fire District No. 2Nyssa Rural Fire Protection DistrictClallam County Fire District No. 5Oak Hill Sanitary DistrictClallam County Fire District No. 6Oak Lodge Sanitary DistrictClallam County Fire Protection District No. 1Oak Lodge Water DistrictClallam County Fire Protection District No. 3Oceanside Water DistrictClallam County Fire Protection District No. 4Ochoco West Sanitary DistrictClallam County Hospital District No. 1Odell Sanitary DistrictClallam County Housing AuthorityOntario Library DistrictClallam County Parks and Recreation District No. 1Oregon Fire Districts AssociationClallam County Public Hospital District No. 2Oregon Infrastructure Finance AuthorityClallam County Public Utility District No. 1Oregon Trail Library DistrictClark County Fire District No. 10Oregon Water Wonderland Unit II Sanitary DistrictClark County Fire District No. 11Owyhee Irrigation DistrictClark County Fire District No. 13Appendix BPage 8 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonPacific City Joint Water Sanitary AuthorityClark County Fire District No. 5Pacific Communities Health DistrictClark County Fire Protection District No. 3Palatine Hill Water DistrictClark County Fire Protection District No. 6Peninsula Drainage District No. 1Clark County Public Utility District No. 1Peninsula Drainage District No. 2Clark Regional Wastewater DistrictPilot Rock Fire Protection DistrictCline Irrigation DistrictPine Grove Rural Fire Protection DistrictClinton Water DistrictPleasant Hill Rural Fire Protection DistrictCoal Creek Utility DistrictPleasant Home Water DistrictColumbia Conservation DistrictPolk County Fire District No‐ 1Columbia County Fire District No. 3Polk County Housing AuthorityColumbia County Public Hospital District No. 1Polk Soil and Water Conservation DistrictColumbia County Rural Library DistrictPortland Metropolitan Area Water DistrictColumbia Irrigation DistrictPublic Procurement AuthorityColumbia Valley Water DistrictRainbow Water DistrictColville Indian Housing AuthorityRaleigh Water DistrictConsolidated Irrigation District No. 14Redmond Area Park and Recreation DistrictCovington Water DistrictRiddle Rural Fire DistrictCowiche Sewer DistrictRiver Forest Acres Special Road DistrictCowlitz County Cemetery District No. 2River Road Park and Recreation DistrictCowlitz County Fire District No. 6Rivergrove Water DistrictCowlitz County Public Utility District No. 1Roads End Sanitary DistrictCowlitz Transit AuthorityRoberts Creek Water DistrictCross Valley Water DistrictRockwood Water People's Utility DistrictDallesport Water DistrictRogue River Cemetery Maintenance DistrictDouglas County Fire District No. 2Rogue Valley Transportation DistrictDouglas County Fire Protection District No. 5Roseburg Urban Sanitary AuthorityDouglas County Public Utility District No. 1Sable Drive Road DistrictDouglas County Sewer District No. 1Salem Area Mass Transit DistrictDouglas‐Okanogan County Fire District No. 15Salem Housing AuthorityEast Columbia Basin Irrigation DistrictSalem‐Keizer Transit DistrictEast Gig Harbor Water DistrictSanta Clara Rural Fire Protection DistrictEast Lewis County Public Development AuthoritySantiam Water Control DistrictEast Pierce Fire and Rescue District No. 22Scappoose Rural Fire DistrictEast Spokane Water District No. 1Scio Rural Fire DistrictEast Wenatchee Water DistrictScottsburg Rural Fire DistrictEastmont Metropolitan Park DistrictSeal Rock Fire DistrictEastsound Sewer and Water DistrictSeal Rock Water DistrictEdmonds Public Facilities DistrictShangri‐La Water DistrictEllensburg Business Development AuthorityShasta View Irrigation DistrictEnterprise Cemetery District No. 7Siletz Rural Fire Protection DistrictEntiat Irrigation DistrictSilverton Fire DistrictEverett Housing AuthoritySisters‐Camp Sherman Rural Fire Protection DistrictEverett Public Facilities DistrictSiuslaw Public Library DistrictEvergreen Water‐Sewer District No. 19South Clackamas Transportation DistrictFall City Water DistrictSouth Suburban Sanitary DistrictFerry County Public Utility District No. 1Southern Curry Cemetery Maintenance DistrictFerry/Okanogan County Fire Protection District No. 13Southwest Lincoln County Water DistrictFisherman Bay Sewer DistrictSpring River Special Road DistrictFoster Creek Conservation DistrictSpringfield Utility DistrictFour Lakes Water District No. 10Stanfield Fire District No. 7‐402Franklin Conservation DistrictStayton Fire DistrictFranklin County Cemetery District No. 2Suburban East Salem Water DistrictFranklin County Fire District No. 1Sunrise Water AuthorityFranklin County Fire Protection District No. 3Sunset Empire Transportation DistrictFranklin County Irrigation District No. 1Swalley Irrigation DistrictFranklin County Public Utility District No. 1Sweet Home Fire and Ambulance DistrictFreeland Water and Sewer DistrictTalent Irrigation DistrictFt. Worden Public Development AuthorityTerrebonne Domestic Water DistrictGardena Farms Irrigation District No. 13Three Sisters Irrigation DistrictGoforth Special Utility DistrictTillamook County Transportation DistrictGrand Coulee Project Hydroelectric AuthorityTillamook People's Utility DistrictGrandview Irrigation DistrictTiller Rural Fire DistrictGrant County Airport District No. 1Toledo Rural Fire Protection DistrictGrant County Fire District No. 10Tri City Rural Fire District No. 4Grant County Fire District No. 11Tri City Water DistrictGrant County Fire District No. 3Tri‐City Service DistrictGrant County Fire District No. 4Tri‐County Metropolitan Transportation DistrictGrant County Fire District No. 7Tualatan Hills Park and Recreation DistrictGrant County Fire Protection District No. 5Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation DistrictGrant County Housing AuthorityTualatin Valley Irrigation DistrictGrant County Mosquito Control District No. 1Tualatin Valley Water DistrictGrant County Mosquito District No. 2Tumalo Irrigation DistrictGrant County Port District No. 4Twin Rocks Sanitary DistrictGrant County Port District No. 6Umatilla County Housing AuthorityGrant County Port District No. 7Umatilla Hospital DistrictGrant County Public Hospital District No. 1Umatilla Land Redevelopment AuthorityGrant County Public Hospital District No. 2Umatilla Morrow Radio and Data DistrictGrant County Public Hospital District No. 3Umatilla Reservation Housing AuthorityGrant County Public Hospital District No. 4Umatilla Rural Fire Protection DistrictGrant County Public Utility District No. 2Union Cemetery DistrictGrant Transit AuthorityVale Oregon Irrigation DistrictGrays Harbor Conservation DistrictValley View Water DistrictGrays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 1Vandevert Acres Special Road DistrictGrays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 12Vineyard Mountain Water and Improvement DistrictGrays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 14Walla Walla River Irrigation DistrictGrays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 2Wallowa County Health Care DistrictGrays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 7Wamic Water and Sanitary AuthorityGrays Harbor County Housing AuthorityWarm Springs Housing AuthorityGrays Harbor County Water District No. 1Wasco County Soil and Water Conservation DistrictGrays Harbor County Water District No. 2Washington County Fire District No. 2Grays Harbor Drainage District No. 1Washington County Housing AuthorityGrays Harbor Fire District No. 10Water Wonderland Improvement DistrictGrays Harbor Historical Seaport AuthorityWedderburn Sanitary DistrictGrays Harbor Public Utility District No. 1Appendix BPage 9 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonWest Slope Water DistrictGrays Harbor Transportation AuthorityWest Valley Housing AuthorityGreater Wenatchee Irrigation DistrictWestern Lane Ambulance DistrictGreater Wenatchee Regional Events Center Public Facilities DistrictWestport Wauna Rural Fire Protection DistrictGreen Tank Irrigation District No. 11Westwood Hills Road DistrictHartstene Pointe Water‐Sewer DistrictWiard Memorial Park DistrictHighland Water DistrictWickiup Water DistrictHighlands Sewer DistrictWillamalane Park and Recreation DistrictHighline Water DistrictWilliams Rural Fire Protection DistrictHistoric Seattle Preservation and Development AuthorityWillow Creek Park DistrictHolmes Harbor Sewer DistrictWinchester Bay Sanitary DistrictHunters Water DistrictWinston‐Dillard Fire DistrictHydro Irrigation District No. 9Winston‐Dillard Water DistrictIcicle Irrigation DistrictWoodburn Rural Fire Protection DistrictInchelium Water DistrictYamhill County Housing AuthorityIrvin Water District No. 6Yamhill Fire Protection DistrictIsland County Fire District No. 3Youngs River‐Lewis and Clark Water DistrictIsland County Fire Protection District No. 1StateIsland County Housing AuthorityOregon Department of Administrative ServicesJefferson County Conservation DistrictOregon Department of RevenueJefferson County Fire District No. 5Oregon Health Licensing AgencyJefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1Oregon Higher Education Coordinating CommissionJefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3Oregon Secretary of StateJefferson County Public Utility District No. 1Oregon State Board of NursingJefferson County Water District No. 3State of OregonJefferson Transit AuthorityTribalJuniper Beach Water DistrictBurns Paiute TribeKapowsin Water DistrictConfederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw IndiansKelso Housing AuthorityConfederated Tribes of Grand Ronde CommunityKennewick Housing AuthorityConfederated Tribes of Siletz IndiansKennewick Irrigation DistrictConfederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian ReservationKennewick Public Facilities DistrictConfederated Tribes of the Warm SpringsKennewick Public Hospital DistrictCoquille Indian TribeKent Fire Department Regional Fire AuthorityKlamath TribesKey Peninsula Metro Parks DistrictKing County Airport District No. 1King County Ferry DistrictKing County Fire Protection District No. 16King County Fire Protection District No. 2King County Fire Protection District No. 20King County Fire Protection District No. 25King County Fire Protection District No. 27King County Fire Protection District No. 28King County Fire Protection District No. 34King County Fire Protection District No. 37King County Fire Protection District No. 40King County Fire Protection District No. 43King County Fire Protection District No. 44King County Fire Protection District No. 45King County Fire Protection District No. 47King County Fire Protection District No. 50King County Flood Control DistrictKing County Hospital District No. 4King County Housing AuthorityKing County Public Hospital District No. 1King County Public Hospital District No. 2King County Water District No. 1King County Water District No. 111King County Water District No. 117King County Water District No. 119King County Water District No. 125King County Water District No. 19King County Water District No. 20King County Water District No. 45King County Water District No. 49King County Water District No. 54King County Water District No. 90Kitsap Conservation DistrictKitsap County Consolidated Housing AuthorityKitsap County Fire District No. 18Kitsap County Public Utility District No. 1Kitsap County Rural Library DistrictKitsap Public Health DistrictKittitas County Conservation DistrictKittitas County Fire District No. 2Kittitas County Fire Protection District No. 7Kittitas County Hospital District No. 2Kittitas County Housing AuthorityKittitas County Public Utility District No. 1Kittitas County Water District No. 5Kittitas County Water District No. 6Kittitas County Water District No. 7Klickitat County Fire District No. 14Klickitat County Fire District No. 15Klickitat County Fire District No.1Klickitat County Fire Protection District No. 4Klickitat County Fire Protection District No. 5Klickitat County Port District No. 1Klickitat County Public Hospital District No. 1Klickitat County Public Hospital District No. 2Klickitat County Public Utility District No. 1Lacey Fire District 3Lake Chelan Reclamation DistrictLake Chelan Sewer DistrictLake Forest Park Water DistrictAppendix BPage 10 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonLake Stevens Sewer DistrictLake Wenatchee Water DistrictLake Whatcom Water and Sewer DistrictLakehaven Utility DistrictLakewood Water DistrictLenora Water and Sewer DistrictLewis County Conservation DistrictLewis County Fire District No. 1Lewis County Fire District No. 11Lewis County Fire District No. 13Lewis County Fire District No. 18Lewis County Fire District No. 9Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 14Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 16Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 2Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 5Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 6Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 8Lewis County Hospital District No. 1Lewis County Public Facilities DistrictLewis County Public Utility District No. 1Lewis County Water District No. 1Lewis County Water District No. 3Lewis Public Transportation Benefit Area AuthorityLiberty Lake Sewer and Water DistrictLincoln County Fire District No. 1Lincoln County Fire District No. 4Lincoln County Fire Protection District No. 5Lincoln County Fire Protection District No. 6Lincoln County Fire Protection District No. 8Lincoln County Hospital District No. 3Lincoln‐Adams County Fire Protection District No. 3Longview Housing AuthorityLopez Island Library DistrictLower Elwha Housing AuthorityLower Squilchuck Irrigation DistrictLummi Housing AuthorityLummi Tribal Sewer and Water DistrictMakah Housing AuthorityMalaga Water DistrictManchester Water DistrictManson Park and Recreation DistrictMarshland Flood Control DistrictMarysville Fire DistrictMason Conservation DistrictMason County Fire District No. 13Mason County Fire District No. 17Mason County Fire District No. 2Mason County Fire District No. 4Mason County Fire Protection District No. 5Mason County Fire Protection District No. 8Mason County Housing AuthorityMason County Public Hospital District No. 1Mason County Public Utility District No. 1Mason County Public Utility District No. 3Mason County Transit AuthorityMethow Valley Irrigation DistrictMid‐Columbia Library DistrictMidway Sewer DistrictMoab Irrigation District No. 20Moses Lake Irrigation and Rehabilitation DistrictMukilteo Water and Wastewater DistrictNaches‐Selah Irrigation DistrictNorth Beach Water DistrictNorth Central Washington Economic Development DistrictNorth City Water DistrictNorth County Regional Fire AuthorityNorth Highline Fire DistrictNorth Perry Avenue Water DistrictNorth Whidbey Park and Recreation DistrictNortheast Sammamish Sewer and Water DistrictNorthshore Utility DistrictNorthwest Park and Recreation District No. 2Okanogan Conservation DistrictOkanogan County Cemetery District No. 4Okanogan County Fire District No. 6Okanogan County Fire Protection District No. 11Okanogan County Housing AuthorityOkanogan County Public Hospital District No. 3Okanogan County Public Hospital District No. 4Okanogan County Public Utility District No. 1Okanogan Fire Protection District No. 16Okanogan Irrigation DistrictOlympic View Water and Sewer DistrictOlympus Terrace Sewer DistrictOrcas Island Library DistrictOrchard Avenue Irrigation District No. 6Oroville Housing AuthorityOroville‐Tonasket Irrigation DistrictOthello Housing AuthorityPacific Conservation DistrictPacific County Fire District No. 2Pacific County Fire Protection District No. 1Pacific County Fire Protection District No. 3Appendix BPage 11 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonPacific County Public Healthcare Services District No. 3Pacific County Public Utility District No. 2Pacific Hospital Preservation and Development AuthorityPalouse Conservation DistrictPasco/Franklin County Housing AuthorityPend Oreille County Fire District No. 2Pend Oreille County Fire District No. 4Pend Oreille County Fire District No. 5Pend Oreille County Library DistrictPend Oreille County Public Hospital District No. 1Pend Oreille County Public Utility District No. 1Peninsula Housing AuthorityPeninsula Metropolitan Park DistrictPeshastin Irrigation DistrictPeshastin Water DistrictPierce Conservation DistrictPierce County Fire District No. 13Pierce County Fire District No. 16Pierce County Fire District No. 18Pierce County Fire District No. 23Pierce County Fire District No. 27Pierce County Fire District No. 3Pierce County Fire District No. 5Pierce County Fire District No. 8Pierce County Fire Protection District No. 14Pierce County Fire Protection District No. 2Pierce County Fire Protection District No. 21Pierce County Housing AuthorityPike Place Market Preservation and Development AuthorityPoint Roberts Water District No. 4Ponderay Shores Water and Sewer DistrictPort Ludlow Drainage DistrictPrescott Joint Parks and Recreation DistrictProsser Fire District No. 3Prosser Public Hospital DistrictPublic Hospital District No. 1Public Hospital District No. 3Public Utility District No‐ 1Puyallup Tribal Health AuthorityQuileute Housing AuthorityQuinault Housing AuthorityQuincy‐Columbia Basin Irrigation DistrictRenton Housing AuthorityRichland Housing AuthorityRichland Public Facilities DistrictRonald Wastewater DistrictRoza Irrigation DistrictSacheen Lake Sewer and Water DistrictSammamish Plateau Water and Sewer DistrictSan Juan Island Library DistrictSaratoga Water DistrictScatchet Head Water DistrictSeattle Chinatown International District Preservation and Development AuthoritySeattle Housing AuthoritySeattle Southside Regional Tourism AuthoritySelah‐Moxee Irrigation DistrictSi View Metropolitan Park DistrictSilver Lake Flood Control DistrictSilver Lake Water And Sewer DistrictSilverdale Water DistrictSkagit Conservation DistrictSkagit County Cemetery District No. 2Skagit County Fire District No. 10Skagit County Fire District No. 11Skagit County Fire District No. 15Skagit County Fire District No. 9Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 13Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 14Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 2Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 3Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 4Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 5Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 8Skagit County Housing AuthoritySkagit County Public Hospital District No. 1Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 2Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 304Skagit County Public Utility District No. 1Skagit County Sewer District No. 1Skagit County Sewer District No. 2Skagit Valley Public Hospital District No. 1Skamania County Fire District No. 1Skamania County Fire District No. 4Skamania County Public Hospital District No. 1Skamania County Public Utility District No. 1Skamokawa Water and Sewer DistrictSkyway Water and Sewer DistrictSnohomish County Fire District No. 15Snohomish County Fire District No. 16Snohomish County Fire District No. 19Snohomish County Fire District No. 26Snohomish County Fire District No. 5Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 17Appendix BPage 12 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonSnohomish County Fire Protection District No. 21Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 22Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 25Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 28Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 3Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 7Snohomish County Housing AuthoritySnohomish County Public Hospital District No. 1Snohomish County Public Hospital District No. 2Snohomish County Public Utility District No. 1Snohomish Health DistrictSnohomish River Regional Water AuthoritySnoqualmie Valley Hospital DistrictSouth Columbia Basin Irrigation DistrictSouth Correctional Entity Public Development AuthoritySouth Naches Irrigation DistrictSouth Whatcom Fire AuthoritySouth Whidbey Parks and Recreation DistrictSouth Yakima Conservation DistrictSouthwest Suburban Sewer DistrictSpokane Conservation DistrictSpokane County Fire District No. 12Spokane County Fire District No. 2Spokane County Fire District No. 4Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 10Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 11Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 13Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 3Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 5Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 8Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 9Spokane County Library DistrictSpokane County Water District No. 3Spokane Housing AuthoritySpokane Indian Housing AuthoritySpokane Public Facilities DistrictSpokane Regional Health DistrictSpokane Transit AuthorityStartup Water DistrictSteptoe Sewer District No. 1Stevens County Fire District No. 2Stevens County Fire District No. 6Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 1Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 10Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 12Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 5Stevens County Public Utility District No. 1Stevens County Rural Library DistrictStevens Pass Sewer DistrictSun Harbor Water District No. 3Sunnyside Housing AuthoritySunnyside Valley Irrigation DistrictSunnyslope Water DistrictSwinomish Housing AuthorityTacoma Community Redevelopment AuthorityTacoma Housing AuthorityTacoma Metropolitan Park DistrictTerrace Heights Sewer DistrictThea Foss Waterway Development AuthorityThree Rivers Regional Wastewater AuthorityThurston Conservation DistrictThurston County Fire District No. 12Thurston County Fire District No. 4Thurston County Fire District No. 9Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 3Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 5Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 6Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 8Thurston County Housing AuthorityThurston County Public Utility District No. 1Tri‐County Economic Development DistrictTukwila Metropolitan Park DistrictUnderwood Conservation DistrictUnion Gap Irrigation DistrictVal Vue Sewer DistrictValley Regional Fire AuthorityValley View Sewer DistrictValley Water DistrictVancouver Housing AuthorityVashon Park DistrictWahkiakum County Public Utility District No. 1Wahkiakum Fire Protection District No. 1Wahkiakum Port District No. 1Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 1Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 3Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 4Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 5Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 8Walla Walla County Rural Library DistrictWalla Walla Housing AuthorityWallula Water District No. 1Washington State Convention Center Public Facilities DistrictWashington State Major League Baseball Stadium Public Facilities DistrictWashington State Tobacco Settlement AuthorityAppendix BPage 13 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonWater District 19Wells Ranch Irrigation DistrictWenatchee Reclamation DistrictWenatchee‐Chiwawa Irrigation DistrictWest Sound Utility DistrictWhatcom Conservation DistrictWhatcom County Fire District No. 1Whatcom County Fire District No. 11Whatcom County Fire District No. 14Whatcom County Fire District No. 16Whatcom County Fire District No. 17Whatcom County Fire District No. 4Whatcom County Fire District No. 5Whatcom County Fire District No. 7Whatcom County Fire District No. 8Whatcom County Public Utility District No. 1Whatcom County Water District No. 12Whatcom County Water District No. 13Whatcom County Water District No. 2Whatcom County Water District No. 7Whatcom Transportation AuthorityWhidbey Island Public Hospital DistrictWhitestone Reclamation DistrictWhitman County Fire District No. 11Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 12Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 14Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 7Whitman County Public Hospital District No. 3Whitman County Rural Library DistrictWhitworth Water District No. 2Willapa Valley Water DistrictWilliam Shore Memorial Pool DistrictWilliams Lake Sewer District No. 2Wine Science Center Development AuthorityWollochet Harbor Sewer DistrictWoodinville Water DistrictYakima County Fire District No. 1Yakima County Fire District No. 3Yakima County Fire District No. 4Yakima County Fire District No. 5Yakima County Fire District No. 6Yakima County Fire Protection District No. 12Yakima County Fire Protection District No. 14Yakima County Mosquito Control DistrictYakima Housing AuthorityYakima Regional Clean Air AuthorityYakima Rural County Library DistrictYakima‐Tieton Irrigation DistrictStateNorth Seattle Community CollegeSeattle CollegesState Of WashingtonWashington State Department of Enterprise ServicesWashington State Department of HealthWashington State Department of Social and Health ServicesWashington State Health Care AuthorityTribalColumbia River Inter‐Tribal Fish CommissionConfederated Tribes of the Chehalis ReservationConfederated Tribes of the Colville ReservationConfederated Tribes of the Yakama NationCowlitz Indian TribeHoh Indian TribeJamestown S'Klallam TribeKalispel Tribe of IndiansLower Elwha Klallam TribeLummi Indian NationMakah TribeMuckleshoot Indian TribeNisqually Indian TribeNooksack Indian TribePort Gamble S'Klallam TribePuyallup Tribe of IndiansQuileute Indian TribeQuinault Indian NationSamish Indian NationSauk‐Suiattle Indian TribeSkokomish Indian TribeSnoqualmie Indian TribeSpokane TribeSquaxin Island TribeStillaguamish Tribe of IndiansSuquamish TribeSwinomish Indian Tribal CommunityTulalip TribesUpper Skagit Indian TribeYakama Nation Land EnterpriseAppendix BPage 14 of 14 Appendix C - Political Subdivision List for Virginia City/Town Special Distrricts Public K-12 County Public Higher Education State Townships City of Alexandria Accomack-Northampton Transportation District Accomack County Public Schools Accomack County Blue Ridge Community College State of Virginia Township of Green, Ross County City of Bristol Albemarle County Service Authority Albemarle County Public Schools Albemarle County Central Virginia Community College Virginia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services City of Buena Vista Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail Authority Alexandria City Public Schools Alleghany County Christopher Newport University Virginia Department of General Services City of Charlottesville Alexandria Redevelopment and Housing Authority Alleghany County Public Schools Amelia County College of William and Mary Virginia Department of Health City of Chesapeake Appomattox River Water Authority Amelia County Public Schools Amherst County Dabney S. Lancaster Community College Virginia Department of Health Professions City of Colonial Heights Bath County Airport Authority Amherst County Public Schools Appomattox County Danville Community College Virginia Department of Public Works City of Covington Bedford County Economic Development Authority Appomattox County Public Schools Arlington County Eastern Shore Community College City of Danville Bedford Regional Water Authority Arlington Public Schools Augusta County Eastern Virginia Medical School City of Emporia Big Stone Gap Redevelopment and Housing Authority Atlantic Shores Christian Schools Bath County George Mason University City of Fairfax Blacksburg-Christiansburg-VPI Water Authority Augusta County Public Schools Bedford County Germanna Community College City of Falls Church Blacksburg-Virginia Polytechnic Institute Sanitation Authority Bath County Public Schools Bedford County Public Service Authority J. Sargeant Reynolds Community College City of Franklin Blue Ridge Airport Authority Bedford County Public Schools Bland County James Madison University City of Fredericksburg Blue Ridge Crossroads Economic Development Authority Bland County Public Schools Botetourt County John Tyler Community College City of Galax Blue Ridge Regional Jail Authority Botetourt County Public Schools Brunswick County Longwood University City of Hampton Blue Ridge Soil and Water Conservation District Bristol Virginia Public Schools Buchanan County Lord Fairfax Community College City of Harrisonburg Bristol Redevelopment and Housing Authority Brunswick County Public Schools Buchanan County Public Service Authority Massanutten Technical Center City of Hopewell Brookneal-Campbell County Airport Authority Buchanan County Schools Buckingham County Mountain Empire Community College City of Lexington Brunswick County Industrial Development Authority Buckingham County Public Schools Buckingham County Board of Supervisors New College Institute City of Lynchburg Buchanan County Industrial Development Authority Buena Vista City Public Schools Campbell County New River Community College City of Manassas Buena Vista Public Service Authority Campbell County Public Schools Caroline County Norfolk State University City of Manassas Park Campbell County Utilities and Service Authority Caroline County Public Schools Carroll County Northern Virginia Community College City of Martinsville Carroll County Industrial Development Authority Carroll County Public Schools Carroll County Public Service Authority Old Dominion University City of Newport News Carroll-Grayson-Galax Solid Waste Authority Charles City County School District Charles City County Patrick Henry Community College City of Norfolk Castlewood Water and Sewage Authority Charlotte County Public Schools Charlotte County Paul D. Camp Community College City of Norton Central Shenandoah Planning District Commission Charlottesville City Schools Chesterfield County Piedmont Virginia Community College City of Petersburg Central Virginia Regional Jail Authority Chesapeake Public Schools Clarke County Radford University City of Poquoson Central Virginia Waste Management Authority Chesterfield County Public Schools Craig County Rappahannock Community College City of Portsmouth Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority Clarke County School District Culpeper County Richard Bland College City of Radford Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Authority Colonial Beach Schools Cumberland County Rowanty Technical Center City of Richmond Chesapeake Airport Authority Colonial Heights Public Schools Dickenson County Southern Virginia Higher Education Center City of Roanoke Chesapeake Bay Bridge and Tunnel District Copper River School District Dinwiddie County Southside Virginia Community College City of Salem Chesapeake Hospital Authority Covington City Public Schools Essex County Southwest Virginia Community College City of Staunton Chesapeake Redevelopment and Housing Authority Craig County Public Schools Fairfax County State Council of Higher Education for Virginia City of Suffolk Coeburn-Norton-Wise Regional Wastewater Authority Culpeper County Public Schools Fauquier County Thomas Nelson Community College City of Virginia Beach Craig-New Castle Solid Waste Authority Cumberland County Public Schools Floyd County Tidewater Community College City of Waynesboro Crater District Area Agency on Aging/Foster Grandparent Program, Inc.Danville Public Schools Fluvanna County University of Mary Washington City of Williamsburg Culpeper Soil and Water Conservation District Dickenson County Public Schools Franklin County University of Virginia City of Winchester Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission Dinwiddie County Public Schools Frederick County University of Virginia Foundation Town of Abingdon Cumberland Plateau Regional Housing Authority Fairfax County Public Schools Giles County University of Virginia Health System Town of Alberta Cumberland Plateau Regional Waste Management Authority Falls Church City Public Schools Gloucester County University of Virginia, Wise Town of Altavista Danville Redevelopment and Housing Authority Fauquier County Public Schools Goochland County Virginia College Savings Plan Town of Amherst Danville-Pittsylvania County Regional Industrial Facilities Authority Floyd County Public Schools Grayson County Virginia Commonwealth University Town of Appalachia Dickenson County Industrial Development Authority Fluvanna County Public Schools Greene County Virginia Community College System Town of Appomattox Dickenson County Public Service Authority Franklin City Schools Greensville County Virginia Highlands Community College Town of Ashland Dinwiddie Airport and Industrial Authority Franklin County Public Schools Halifax County Virginia Military Institute Town of Bedford Dinwiddie County Water Authority Frederick County Public Schools Hanover County Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Town of Berryville District Three Governmental Cooperative Fredericksburg City Public Schools Henrico County Virginia State University Town of Big Stone Gap Dryden Water Authority Galax City Public Schools Henry County Virginia Western Community College Town of Blacksburg Eastern Shore of Virginia Broadband Authority Giles County Public Schools Henry County Public Service Authority Wytheville Community College Town of Bluefield Essex County Industrial Development Authority Gloucester County Public Schools Highland County Town of Boones Mill Fairfax County Economic Development Authority Goochland County Public Schools Isle of Wight County Town of Bowling Green Fairfax County Park Authority Grayson County Public Schools James City County Town of Boyce Fairfax County Redevelopment and Housing Authority Greene County Schools King and Queen County Town of Boydton Fairfax County Water Authority Greensville County Public Schools King George County Town of Bridgewater Fauquier County Water and Sanitation Authority Halifax County Public Schools King George County Service Authority Town of Broadway Floyd County Economic Development Authority Hampton City Schools King William County Town of Brodnax Floyd-Floyd County Public Service Authority Hanover County Public Schools Lancaster County Town of Brookneal Franklin Redevelopment and Housing Authority Harrisonburg City Public Schools Lee County Town of Buchanan Frederick County Sanitation Authority Henrico County Public Schools Loudoun County Town of Burkeville Fredericksburg Stafford Park Authority Henry County Public Schools Louisa County Town of Cape Charles Frederick-Winchester Service Authority Highland County Public Schools Lunenburg County Town of Cedar Bluff Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority Hopewell Public Schools Madison County Town of Charlotte Court House Ft. Monroe Authority Imagine Schools Mathews County Town of Chase City Giles County Public Service Authority Isle of Wight County Schools Mecklenburg County Town of Chatham Greensville County Water and Sewer Authority King and Queen County Public Schools Middlesex County Town of Cheriton Halifax County Industrial Development Authority King George County Public Schools Montgomery County Town of Chilhowie Halifax County Service Authority King William County Public Schools Nelson County Town of Chincoteague Hampton Redevelopment and Housing Authority Lancaster County Public School System New Kent County Town of Christiansburg Hampton Roads Planning District Commission Lee County Public Schools Northampton County Town of Claremont Hampton Roads Regional Jail Authority Lexington City Schools Northumberland County Town of Clarksville Hampton Roads Sanitation District Loudoun County Public Schools Nottoway County Town of Clifton Harrisonburg Redevelopment and Housing Authority Louisa County Public Schools Orange County Town of Clifton Forge Harrisonburg-Rockingham Regional Sewer Authority Lynchburg City Schools Page County Town of Clinchco Headwaters Soil and Water Conservation District Madison County Public Schools Patrick County Town of Clintwood Hopewell Redevelopment and Housing Authority Manassas City Public Schools Pittsylvania County Town of Coeburn James River Water Authority Manassas Park City Schools Pittsylvania County Service Authority Town of Colonial Beach John Flannagan Water Authority Martinsville Public Schools Powhatan County Town of Columbia Joint Public Service Authority Mathews County School District Prince Edward County Town of Courtland Lee County Industrial Development Authority Mecklenburg County Public Schools Prince George County Town of Craigsville Lee County Public Service Authority Middlesex County Public Schools Prince William County Town of Crewe LENOWISCO Planning District Commission Montgomery County Public Schools Prince William County Service Authority Town of Culpeper Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District Nelson County Public Schools Pulaski County Town of Damascus Loudoun County Sanitation Authority New Kent County Schools Rappahannock County Town of Dayton Louisa County Water Authority Newport News Public Schools Richmond County Town of Dendron Lynchburg Redevelopment and Housing Authority Norfolk Public Schools Roanoke County Town of Dillwyn Marion Redevelopment and Housing Authority Northampton County School District Rockbridge County Town of Drakes Branch Maury Service Authority Northumberland County Public Schools Rockbridge County Public Service Authority Town of Dublin Mecklenburg-Brunswick Regional Airport Authority Norton City Public Schools Rockingham County Town of Dumfries Meherrin River Regional Jail Authority Nottoway County Public Schools Russell County Town of Dungannon Middle Peninsula Regional Airport Authority Orange County Public Schools Scott County Appendix C Page 1 of 2 City/Town Special Distrricts Public K-12 County Public Higher Education State Townships Town of Elkton Montgomery County Public Service Authority Page County Public Schools Scott County Public Service Authority Town of Exmore Montgomery Regional Solid Waste Authority Patrick County Public Schools Shenandoah County Town of Farmville Mt. Rogers Planning District Commission Petersburg City Public Schools Smyth County Town of Fincastle New River Regional Water Authority Pittsylvania County School District Southampton County Town of Floyd New River Resource Authority Poquoson City Public Schools Spotsylvania County Town of Fries New River Valley Planning District Commission Portsmouth Public Schools Stafford County Town of Front Royal New River Valley Regional Jail Authority Powhatan County Public Schools Surry County Town of Gate City Newport News Redevelopment and Housing Authority Prince Edward County Schools Sussex County Town of Glade Spring Nicholas County Solid Waste Authority Prince George County Public Schools Tazewell County Town of Glasgow Norfolk Airport Authority Prince William County Schools Tri-County Lake Administrative Commission Town of Glen Lyn Norfolk Economic Development Authority Pulaski County Public Schools Warren County Town of Gordonsville Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority Radford City Schools Washington County Town of Goshen Northern Neck Planning District Commission Rappahannock County Public Schools Westmoreland County Town of Gretna Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority Richmond City Public Schools Wise County Town of Grottoes Northern Virginia Transportation Authority Richmond County Public Schools Wythe County Town of Halifax Northwestern Regional Jail Authority Roanoke City Public Schools York County Town of Hamilton NRV Regional Water Authority Roanoke County Public Schools Town of Haymarket Pamunkey Regional Jail Authority Rockbridge County Schools Town of Haysi Patrick County Economic Development Authority Rockingham County Public Schools Town of Herndon Pepper's Ferry Regional Wastewater Treatment Authority Russell County Public Schools Town of Hillsville Petersburg Redevelopment and Housing Authority Salem City Schools Town of Honaker Peumansend Creek Regional Jail Authority Scott County Public Schools Town of Hurt Piedmont Soil and Water Conservation District Shenandoah County Public Schools Town of Independence Planning District One Behavioral Health Services Smyth County Public Schools Town of Iron Gate Portsmouth Redevelopment and Housing Authority Southampton County Public Schools Town of Irvington Prince William County Park Authority Spotsylvania County Public Schools Town of Jonesville Pulaski County Public Service Authority Stafford County Public Schools Town of Kenbridge Pulaski County Sewerage Authority Staunton City Schools Town of Keysville Radford Industrial Development Authority Suffolk Public Schools Town of Kilmarnock Randolph County Water, Sewer and Fire Protection Authority Surry County Public Schools Town of La Crosse Rapidan Service Authority Sussex County Public Schools Town of Lawrenceville Rappahannock Regional Jail Authority Tazewell County Public Schools Town of Leesburg Rappahannock-Shenandoah-Warren Regional Jail Authority Virginia Beach City Public Schools Town of Louisa Region 2000 Services Authority Warren County Public Schools Town of Lovettsville Richmond Behavioral Health Authority Washington County School District Town of Luray Richmond Hospital Authority Waynesboro Public Schools Town of Marion Richmond Metropolitan Authority West Point Public Schools Town of Middleburg Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority Westmoreland County Public Schools Town of Middletown Richmond Regional Planning District Commission Williamsburg-James City County Public Schools Town of Mineral Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Winchester Public Schools Town of Monterey Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority Wise County Public Schools Town of Montross Riverside Regional Jail Authority Wythe County Public Schools Town of Mt. Jackson Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority York County Public Schools Town of Narrows Roanoke River Service Authority Town of New Castle Roanoke Valley Broadband Authority Town of New Market Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Town of Nickelsville Robert E. Lee Soil and Water Conservation District Town of Occoquan Rockbridge Area Network Authority Town of Onancock Rockbridge County Solid Waste Authority Town of Orange Russell County Industrial Development Authority Town of Pamplin City Russell County Public Service Authority Town of Parksley Scott County Economic Development Authority Town of Pearisburg Scott County Redevelopment and Housing Authority Town of Pembroke Shenandoah Valley Soil and Water Conservation District Town of Pennington Gap Smyth County Industrial Development Authority Town of Phenix Smyth Washington Regional Industrial Facilities Authority Town of Pocahontas South Central Wastewater Authority Town of Pound Southeastern Public Service Authority Town of Pulaski Southside Planning District Town of Purcellville Southside Regional Jail Authority Town of Quantico Southwest Regional Recreation Authority Town of Remington Southwest Virginia Regional Jail Authority Town of Rich Creek Suffolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority Town of Richlands Tappahannock-Essex County Airport Authority Town of Ridgeway Tazewell County Airport Authority Town of Rocky Mount Tazewell County Industrial Development Authority Town of Round Hill Tazewell County Public Service Authority Town of Rural Retreat Tazwell County Public Service Authority Town of Saltville Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission Town of Scottsville Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District Town of Shenandoah Toms Brook-Maurertown Sanitary District Town of Smithfield Upper Occoquan Service Authority Town of South Boston Valley Municipal Utility District No. 2 Town of South Hill Vint Hill Economic Development Authority Town of St. Paul Virginia Beach Development Authority Town of Stanley Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority Town of Stephens City Virginia Highlands Airport Authority Town of Strasburg Virginia Housing Development Authority Town of Stuart Virginia Peninsulas Public Service Authority Town of Tangier Virginia Port Authority Town of Tappahannock Virginia Resources Authority Town of Tazewell Virginia Tech/Montgomery Regional Airport Authority Town of Timberville Virginia/Carolina Water Authority Town of Troutville Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority Town of Urbanna Washington County Industrial Development Authority Town of Victoria Washington County Service Authority Town of Vienna Waynesboro Economic Development Authority Town of Vinton Waynesboro Redevelopment and Housing Authority Town of Wakefield West Piedmont Planning District Town of Warrenton Western Virginia Water Authority Town of Warsaw Williamsburg Area Transit Authority Town of Washington Winchester Regional Airport Authority Town of Waverly Wired Road Authority Town of West Point Wise County Public Service Authority Town of White Stone Wise County Redevelopment and Housing Authority Town of Windsor Woodway Water and Sewer Authority Town of Wise Wytheville Redevelopment and Housing Authority Town of Woodstock Town of Wytheville Appendix C Page 2 of 2 (A) Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(1), Sourcewell is entitled to exercise all administrative, contractual, or other remedies permitted by law to enforce Vendor’s compliance with the terms of the request for proposal and contract award, including but not limited to those remedies set forth at 44 CFR 13.43. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (B) Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(2), Sourcewell may terminate the contract award for cause or convenience in accordance with the procedures set forth in the request for proposal and contract award and those provided by 44 CFR 13.44. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (C)Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(3)-(6)(12), and (13), Vendor shall comply with the following federal laws during the term of an award for this contract by Sourcewell: a.Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, entitled “Equal Employment Opportunity,” as amended by Executive Order 11375 of October 13, 1967, and as supplemented in Department of Labor (“DOL”) regulations (41 CFR Ch. 60); b.Copeland “Anti-Kickback” Act (18 U.S.C. 874), as supplemented in DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 3); c.Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276a-276a-7) as supplemented by DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 5); d.Section 103 and 107 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 327-330) as supplemented by DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 5); e.Section 306 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 1857(h), section 508 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1368), Executive Order 11738, and Environmental Protection Agency regulations (40 CFR part 15); and Appendix D SOURCEWELL℠ (Formerly NJPA) AWARDED VENDOR REQUIRED FEMA TERMS AND CONDITIONS CERTIFICATION Procurements by Sourcewell℠ (Formerly NJPA) or Sourcewell Members utilizing funds under a federal grant or contract funded all or in part by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may be subject to specific federal laws, regulations, and requirements in addition to those under other federal, state and local laws. This may include, but is not limited to, the procurement standards of the Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments, Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 13 (44 CFR Part 13). The terms included in this section express Vendors willingness and ability to comply with certain requirements which may be applicable to specific Sourcewell Member purchases using FEMA grant or contract dollars. Sourcewell Members may also require Proposers to enter into ancillary agreements, in addition to the Sourcewell contract’s general terms and conditions, to address a Member’s specific contractual needs, including contract requirements for a procurement using FEMA grants or contracts. Sourcewell reserves the right at any time within a contract term to require an awarded Vendor to reaffirm or resubmit proper documentation relating to these requirements. Note: The numbering and identification contained within this section is only for reference purposes and does not identify any actual Federal designation or location of the rule. Rules are located in 44 CFR Part 13. 1 f. Mandatory standards and policies relating to energy efficiency which are contained in the state energy conservation plan issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (Pub. L. 94-163, 89 Stat. 871). _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (D)Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(7), Vendor shall comply with FEMA requirements and regulations pertaining to reporting, including but not limited to those set forth at 44 CFR 40 and 41. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (E)Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(8), Vendor agrees to the following provisions regarding patents: a.During the term of an award for this contract by Sourcewell, all rights to inventions and/or discoveries that arise or are developed, in the course of or under this request for proposal and contract award, shall belong to the Sourcewell Member and be disposed of in accordance with their policy. Sourcewell and Sourcewell members, at its own discretion, may file for patents in connection with all rights to any such inventions and/or discoveries. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (F)Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(9), Vendor agrees to the following provisions, regarding copyrights: a.During the term of an award for this contract by Sourcewell, any copyrightable material or inventions, in accordance with 44 CFR 13.34, FEMA reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish or otherwise use, for Federal Government purposes: (1)The copyright in any work developed under a grant or contract; and (2) Any rights of copyright to which a grantee or a contactor purchases ownership with grant support. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (G) Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(10), Vendor shall maintain any books, documents, papers, and records of the Vendor which are directly pertinent to this request for proposal and contract award. At any time during normal business hours and as often as Sourcewell or Sourcewell Members deems necessary, Vendor shall permit Sourcewell or Sourcewell Member, FEMA, the Comptroller General of United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives to inspect and photocopy such records for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcriptions _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (H) Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(11), Vendor shall retain all required records for three years after FEMA or Sourcewell or Sourcewell Members makes final payments and all other pending matters are closed. In addition, Vendor shall comply with record retention requirements set forth in 44 CFR 13.42 Appendix D 2 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative Vendor agrees to comply with federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulations and ordinances, as applicable. It is further acknowledged that Vendor certifies compliance with provisions, laws, acts, regulations, etc. as noted above. This certification shall be effective through the term of the Vendor’s Sourcewell awarded contract. Vendor: ___________________________________________________________________ Contract number: ___________________________________________________________________ Category: ___________________________________________________________________ Maturity date: ___________________________________________________________________ Address: ___________________________________________________________________ City, state, zip code: ___________________________________________________________________ Phone number: ___________________________________________________________________ Printed name and title of authorized representative: ___________________________________________________________________ Signature of authorized representative: ___________________________________________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________________________________ Appendix D 3 ADDENDUM ONE (1) to that certain Sourcewell RFP #032119 Issued by Sourcewell ℠ (Formerly NJPA) for the procurement of HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, ATTACHMENTS, AND SUPPLIES Consider the following to be part of the above‐titled RFP: Appendices B, C and D. Appendices B, C and D, referenced as items 13, 14 and 15 respectively in the RFP Table of Contents, were erroneously omitted from the version of the RFP document originally published on the Sourcewell website and provided to inquirers. Appendices B, C and D are attached to this Addendum, and have now been added to the posted version of the RFP document. Acknowledgment of Addendum One (1) to RFP #032119 emailed on February 21, 2019. COMPANY NAME: _________________________________________________ SIGNATURE: _________________________________________________ DATE: ________________________________ Please include this signed Addendum with your RFP response. Appendix B ‐ Political Subdivision List for HI, ID, OR, SC, UT, WAHawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonCounty County County County County CountyHawaii County Ada County Baker County Abbeville County Beaver County Adams CountyKauai County Adams County Benton County Aiken County Box Elder County Asotin CountyMaui County Bannock County Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council Allendale County Cache County Benton CountyMunicipalityBear Lake County Clackamas County Anderson County Carbon County Chelan CountyCity and County of Honolulu Benewah County Clackamas County Service District No. 1 Bamberg County Daggett County Clallam CountyHigher EducationBingham County Clatsop County Barnwell County Davis County Clark CountyHawaii Community College Blaine County Columbia County Beaufort County Duchesne County Columbia CountyHonolulu Community College Boise County Coos County Berkeley County Duchesne County Special Service District No. 2 Cowlitz CountyUniversity of Hawaii Bonner County Crook County Calhoun County Emery County Douglas CountyUniversity of Hawaii Research Corporation Bonneville County Curry County Catawba Regional Council of Governments Five County Association of Governments Ferry CountyWindward Community College Boundary County Deschutes County Central Midlands Council of Governments Garfield County Franklin CountyEducation (K‐12)Butte County Douglas County Charleston County Grand County Garfield CountyHanalani Schools Camas County Gilliam County Cherokee County Iron County Grant CountyKamehameha Schools Canyon County Grant County Chester County Juab County Grays Harbor CountySpecial DistrictCaribou County Harney County Chesterfield County Kane County Island CountyHawaii Community Development Authority Cassia County Hood River County Clarendon County Millard County Jefferson CountyHawaii Public Housing Authority Clark County Jackson County Colleton County Morgan County King CountyHawaii Tourism Authority Clearwater County Jefferson County Darlington County Piute County King County Directors' AssociationHonolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation Custer County Josephine County Dillon County Rich County Kitsap CountyNatural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority Elmore County Klamath County Dorchester County Salt Lake County Kittitas CountyStateFranklin County Lake County Edgefield County San Juan County Klickitat CountyHawaii Department of Accounting and General ServicesFremont County Lane Council of Governments Fairfield County Sanpete County Lewis CountyHawaii Department of Finance and Administration Gem County Lane County Florence County Sevier County Lincoln CountyHawaii Department of Health Gooding County Lincoln County Georgetown County Summit County Mason CountyHawaii Employer‐Union Health Benefits Trust Fund Idaho County Linn County Greenville County Tooele County Okanogan CountyHawaii Health Systems Corporation Jefferson County Malheur CountyGreenwood County Uintah County Pacific CountyState Of Hawaii Jerome County Marion County Hampton County Utah County Pend Oreille CountyKootenai County Marion County Housing Authority Horry County Wasatch County Pierce CountyLatah County Morrow County Jasper County Washington County San Juan CountyLemhi County Multnomah County Kershaw County Wayne County Skagit CountyLewis County Polk County Lancaster County Weber County Skamania CountyLincoln County Sherman County Laurens CountyMunicipalitySnohomish CountyMadison County Tillamook County Lee County Centerfield City Spokane CountyMinidoka County Umatilla County Lexington County City of Alpine City Stevens CountyNez Perce County Union County Lower Savannah Council of Governments City of American Fork Thurston CountyOneida County Wallowa County Marion County City of Aurora Thurston Regional Planning CouncilOwyhee County Wasco County Marlboro County City of Ballard Wahkiakum CountyPayette County Washington County McCormick County City of Beaver Walla Walla CountyPower County Wheeler County Newberry County City of Blanding Whatcom CountyShoshone County Yamhill County Oconee County City of Bluffdale Whitman CountyTeton CountyMunicipalityOrangeburg County City of Bountiful Yakima CountyTwin Falls County City of Adair Village Pickens County City of Brigham Yakima County Public ServicesValley County City of Adrian Richland County City of Castle Dale Yakima Valley Conference of GovernmentsWashington County City of Albany Saluda County City of Cedar CityMunicipalityMunicipalityCity of Amity Spartanburg County City of Cedar Hills City of AberdeenCity of Aberdeen City of Arlington Sumter County City of Centerville City of Airway HeightsCity of Albion City of Ashland Union County City of Clearfield City of AlgonaCity of American Falls City of Astoria Williamsburg County City of Clinton City of AnacortesCity of Ammon City of Athena York County City of Coalville City of ArlingtonCity of Arco City of AumsvilleMunicipalityCity of Colorado City City of AsotinCity of Arimo City of Aurora City of Abbeville City of Corinne City City of AuburnCity of Ashton City of Baker City City of Aiken City of Cottonwood Heights City of Bainbridge IslandCity of Athol City of Bandon City of Anderson City of Delta City of Battle GroundCity of Atomic City City of Banks City of Barnwell City of Draper City of BellevueCity of Bancroft City of Bay City City of Beaufort City of Duchesne City of BellinghamCity of Bellevue City of Beaverton City of Belton City of East Carbon City of Benton CityCity of Blackfoot City of Bend City of Bennettsville City of Elk Ridge City of BingenCity of Bliss City of Boardman City of Bishopville City of Elmo City of Black DiamondCity of Bloomington City of Brookings City of Camden City of EnochCity of BlaineCity of Boise City of Brownsville City of Cayce City of EnterpriseCity of Bonney LakeCity of Bonners Ferry City of Burns City of Charleston City of Ephraim City of BothellCity of Bovill City of Canby City of Chesnee City of Escalante City of BremertonCity of Buhl City of Cannon Beach City of Chester City of Eureka City of BrewsterCity of Burley City of Canyonville City of Clemson City of Fairview City of BridgeportCity of Caldwell City of Carlton City of Clinton City of FarmingtonCity of BrierCity of Cambridge City of Cascade Locks City of Columbia City of Farr West City of BuckleyCity of Carey City of Cave Junction City of Conway City of Ferron City of BurienCity of Cascade City of Central Point City of Darlington City of Fillmore City of BurlingtonCity of Castleford City of Chiloquin City of Denmark City of Fountain Green City of CamasCity of Challis City of Clatskanie City of Dillon City of Fruit Heights City of CarnationCity of Chubbuck City of Coburg City of Easley City of Garland City of CashmereCity of Clayton City of Columbia City City of Florence City of Grantsville City of Castle RockCity of Clifton City of Condon City of Folly Beach City of Green River City of CentraliaCity of Coeur d'Alene City of Coos Bay City of Forest Acres City of Gunnison City of ChehalisCity of Council City of Coquille City of Fountain Inn City of Harrisville City of ChelanCity of Craigmont City of Cornelius City of Gaffney City of Heber City City of CheneyCity of Crouch City of Corvallis City of Georgetown City of Helper City City of ChewelahAppendix BPage 1 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonCity of Culdesac City of Cottage Grove City of Goose Creek City of Herriman City of ClarkstonCity of Dalton Gardens City of Cove City of Greenville City of Highland City of Cle ElumCity of Dayton City of Creswell City of Greenwood City of Hildale City of Clyde HillCity of Deary City of Culver City of Greer City of Holladay City of ColfaxCity of Dietrich City of Dallas City of Hanahan City of HoneyvilleCity of College PlaceCity of Donnelly City of Damascus City of Hardeeville City of Hooper City of ColvilleCity of Dover City of Dayton City of Hartsville City of HuntingtonCity of ConnellCity of Downey City of Dayville City of Inman City of Hurricane City of CosmopolisCity of Driggs City of Depoe Bay City of Isle of Palms City of Hyde Park City of CovingtonCity of Dubois City of Detroit City of Johnsonville City of Hyrum City of DavenportCity of Eagle City of Donald City of Lake City City of Ivins City of DaytonCity of Eden City of Drain City of Lancaster City of Kamas City of Deer ParkCity of Elk River City of Dundee City of Landrum City of Kanab City of Des MoinesCity of Emmett City of Dunes City City of Laurens City of Kaysville City of DuPontCity of Fairfield City of Durham City of Liberty City of La VerkinCity of DuvallCity of Fernan Lake Village City of Eagle Point City of Loris City of Layton City of East WenatcheeCity of Filer City of Echo City of Manning City of Lehi City of EdgewoodCity of Firth City of Elgin City of Marion City of Lewiston City of EdmondsCity of Franklin City of Enterprise City of Mauldin City of LindonCity of Electric CityCity of Fruitland City of Estacada City of Mullins City of Logan City of EllensburgCity of Garden City City of Eugene City of Myrtle Beach City of Manti City of ElmaCity of Genesee City of Fairview City of New Ellenton City of Mapleton City of EntiatCity of Georgetown City of Falls City City of Newberry City of Marriott‐Slaterville City of EnumclawCity of Glenns Ferry City of Florence City of North Augusta City of Mendon City of EphrataCity of Gooding City of Forest Grove City of North Charleston City of Midvale City of EverettCity of Grace City of Fossil City of North Myrtle Beach City of Midway City of EversonCity of Grand View City of Garibaldi City of Orangeburg City of Milford City of Federal WayCity of Grangeville City of Gaston City of Pickens City of Millville City of FerndaleCity of GreenleafCity of Gates City of Rock Hill City of Moab City of FifeCity of Hagerman City of Gearhart City of Seneca City of Mona City of FircrestCity of Hailey City of Gervais City of Simpsonville City of MonroeCity of ForksCity of Hansen City of Gladstone City of Spartanburg City of Monticello City of GeorgeCity of Harrison City of Glendale City of Sumter City of Morgan City of Gig HarborCity of Hayden City of Gold Beach City of Tega Cay City of Moroni City of Gold BarCity of Hazelton City of Gold Hill City of Travelers Rest City of Mt. Pleasant City City of GoldendaleCity of Heyburn City of Grants Pass City of Union City of Murray City of Grand CouleeCity of Hollister City of Greenhorn City of Walhalla City of MytonCity of GrandviewCity of Homedale City of Gresham City of Walterboro City of NaplesCity of GrangerCity of Hope City of Haines City of Wellford City of Nephi City of Granite FallsCity of Horseshoe Bend City of Halfway City of West Columbia City of Nibley City of HarringtonCity of Huetter City of Halsey City of Westminster City of North Logan City of HoquiamCity of Idaho City City of Happy Valley City of WoodruffCity of North Ogden City of IlwacoCity of Idaho Falls City of Harrisburg City of York City of North Salt Lake City of IssaquahCity of Inkom City of Helix Town of Allendale City of Oakley City of KahlotusCity of Island Park City of Heppner Town of Andrews City of Ogden City of KalamaCity of Jerome City of Hermiston Town of Atlantic Beach City of Orangeville City of KelsoCity of Juliaetta City of Hillsboro Town of Awendaw City of Orem City of KenmoreCity of Kamiah City of Hines Town of Aynor City of Panguitch City of KennewickCity of Kellogg City of Hood River Town of Batesburg‐Leesville City of Park City City of KentCity of Kendrick City of Hubbard Town of Bethune City of Parowan City of Kettle FallsCity of Ketchum City of Huntington Town of Blacksburg City of Payson City of KirklandCity of Kimberly City of Idanha Town of Blackville City of Perry City of KittitasCity of Kooskia City of Imbler Town of Blenheim City of Plain CityCity of La CenterCity of Kuna City of Independence Town of Bluffton City of Pleasant Grove City of LaceyCity of Lapwai City of Irrigon Town of Blythewood City of Pleasant View City of Lake Forest ParkCity of Lava Hot Springs City of Island City Town of Bowman City of Price City of Lake StevensCity of Lewiston City of Jacksonville Town of Branchville City of Providence City of LakewoodCity of Mackay City of Jefferson Town of Briarcliffe Acres City of Provo City of LangleyCity of Malad City City of John Day Town of Brunson City of Richfield City of LeavenworthCity of Marsing City of Johnson City Town of Calhoun Falls City of Richmond City of Liberty LakeCity of McCall City of Joseph Town of Cameron City of River Heights City of Long BeachCity of McCammon City of Junction City Town of Campobello City of Riverdale City of LongviewCity of Melba City of Keizer Town of Central City of Riverton City of LyndenCity of Menan City of King City Town of Chapin City of Roosevelt City of LynnwoodCity of Meridian City of Klamath Falls Town of Cheraw City of Roy City of MabtonCity of Middleton City of La Grande Town of Chesterfield City of Salem City of Maple ValleyCity of Midvale City of La Pine Town of Clio City of Salina City of MarysvilleCity of Moscow City of Lafayette Town of Clover City of Salt Lake City City of MattawaCity of Mountain Home City of Lake Oswego Town of Cottageville City of Sandy City of McClearyCity of Mullan City of Lakeside Town of Coward City of Santa ClaraCity of Medical LakeCity of Murtaugh City of Lebanon Town of Cowpens City of SantaquinCity of MedinaCity of Nampa City of Lincoln City Town of Denmark City of Saratoga Springs City of Mercer IslandCity of New Meadows City of Lonerock Town of Donalds City of Smithfield City City of MesaCity of New Plymouth City of Lostine Town of Due West City of South Jordan City of Mill CreekCity of Newdale City of Lowell Town of Duncan City of South Ogden City of MiltonCity of Nezperce City of Lyons Town of Eastover City of South Salt Lake City City of MonroeCity of Notus City of Madras Town of Edgefield City of South WeberCity of MontesanoCity of Orofino City of Malin Town of Edisto Beach City of Spanish Fork City of MortonCity of Osburn City of Manzanita Town of Ehrhardt City of Spring City City of Moses LakeCity of Parker City of Maupin Town of Elgin City of Springville City of MossyrockCity of Parma City of McMinnville Town of Elloree City of St. George City of Mountlake TerraceCity of Paul City of Medford Town of Estill City of Sunnyside City of MoxeeCity of Payette City of Metolius Town of Eutawville City of SunsetCity of Mt. VernonCity of Pierce City of Mill City Town of Fairfax City of Syracuse City of MukilteoCity of Pinehurst City of Millersburg Town of Ft. Mill City of Taylorsville City of NapavineCity of Plummer City of Milton‐Freewater Town of Furman City of Tooele City of NewcastleCity of Pocatello City of Milwaukie Town of Gaston City of Toquerville City of NewportCity of Ponderay City of Molalla Town of Gifford City of TremontonCity of NooksackCity of Post Falls City of Monmouth Town of Gilbert City of TropicCity of Normandy ParkCity of Potlatch City of Monroe Town of Govan City of Uintah City of North BendCity of Preston City of Monument Town of Gray Court City of VernalCity of North BonnevilleCity of Priest River City of Moro Town of Great Falls City of Washington City of Oak HarborCity of Rathdrum City of Mosier Town of Greeleyville City of Washington Terrace City of OakvilleCity of Reubens City of Mt. Angel Town of Hampton City of Wellington City of Ocean ShoresAppendix BPage 2 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonCity of Rexburg City of Mt. Vernon Town of Harleyville City of Wellsville City of OkanoganCity of Richfield City of Myrtle Creek Town of Heath Springs City of Wendover City of OlympiaCity of Rigby City of Myrtle Point Town of Hemingway City of West Bountiful City of OmakCity of Riggins City of Nehalem Town of Hilda City of West Haven City City of OrovilleCity of Ririe City of Newberg Town of Hilton Head Island City of West Jordan City of OrtingCity of Roberts City of Newport Town of Hodges City of West Point City of OthelloCity of Rockland City of North Bend Town of Holly Hill City of West Valley City City of PacificCity of Rupert City of North Plains Town of Hollywood City of Willard City of PalouseCity of Salmon City of North Powder Town of Honea Path City of Woodland Hills City of PascoCity of Sandpoint City of Nyssa Town of Irmo City of Woods Cross City of PaterosCity of Shelley City of Oakland Town of Iva Town of Alta City of PomeroyCity of Shoshone City of Oakridge Town of Jackson Town of AltamontCity of Port AngelesCity of Smelterville City of Ontario Town of James Island Town of Alton City of Port OrchardCity of Soda Springs City of Oregon City Town of Jamestown Town of Amalga City of Port TownsendCity of Spirit Lake City of Paisley Town of Jefferson Town of Annabella City of PoulsboCity of St. Anthony City of Pendleton Town of Jenkinsville Town of Antimony City of ProsserCity of St. Charles City of Philomath Town of Johnston Town of Apple Valley City of PullmanCity of Stanley City of Phoenix Town of Jonesville Town of BallardCity of PuyallupCity of Star City of Pilot Rock Town of Kershaw Town of Bear River City City of QuincyCity of Stites City of Port Orford Town of Kiawah Island Town of Bicknell City of RainierCity of Sugar City City of Portland Town of Kingstree Town of Big Water City of RaymondCity of Sun Valley City of Powers Town of Lake View Town of BoulderCity of RedmondCity of Tensed City of Prairie City Town of Lamar South Carolina Town of Brian Head City of RentonCity of Tetonia City of Prineville Town of Lane Town of Bryce Canyon City City of RepublicCity of Troy City of Rainier Town of Latta Town of Cannonville City of RichlandCity of Twin Falls City of Redmond Town of Lexington Town of Castle Valley City of RidgefieldCity of Ucon City of Reedsport Town of Lincolnville Town of Cedar Fort City of RitzvilleCity of Victor City of Richland Town of Little Mountain Town of Centerfield City of Rock IslandCity of Wallace City of Riddle Town of Lockhart Town of Central Valley City of RoslynCity of Weippe City of Rockaway Beach Town of Lyman Town of Circleville City of RoyCity of Weiser City of Rogue River Town of Lynchburg Town of Clarkston City of Royal CityCity of Wendell City of Roseburg Town of Mayesville Town of Clawson City of SammamishCity of Weston City of Rufus Town of McBee Town of Cleveland City of SeaTacCity of White Bird City of Salem Town of McClellanville Town of Cornish City of SeattleCity of Wilder City of Sandy Town of McColl Town of Daniel City of Sedro‐WoolleyCity of Winchester City of Scappoose Town of McCormick Town of Deweyville City of SelahHigher EducationCity of Scio Town of Meggett Town of Eagle Mountain City of SequimBoise State University City of Scotts Mills Town of Moncks CornerTown of Elmo City of SheltonCollege of Southern Idaho City of Seaside Town of Mt. Pleasant Town of Elsinore City of ShorelineCollege of Western Idaho City of Seneca Town of Neeses Town of Elwood City of SnohomishEastern Idaho Technical College City of Shady Cove Town of New Ellenton Town of Emery City of SnoqualmieIdaho Division of Professional Technical Education City of Sheridan Town of Nichols Town of Fairfield City of Soap LakeIdaho State University City of Sherwood Town of Ninety Six Town of Francis City of South BendLewis‐Clark State College City of Siletz Town of Norris Town of Garden City City of SpokaneNorth Idaho College City of Silverton Town of North Town of GenolaCity of Spokane ValleyUniversity of Idaho City of Sisters Town of Norway Town of Glendale City of SpragueEducation (K‐12)City of Sodaville Town of Olanta Town of Glenwood City of StanwoodAberdeen School District No. 58 City of Spray Town of Pacolet Town of Goshen City of StevensonArbon Elementary School District No. 383 City of Springfield Town of Pageland Town of Hanksville City of SultanAvery School District City of St. Helens Town of Pamplico Town of Hatch City of SumasBasin School District No. 72 City of St. Paul Town of Patrick Town of Henefer City of SumnerBear Lake County School District No. 33 City of Stanfield Town of Pawleys Island Town of Henrieville City of SunnysideBear Lake School District No. 33 City of Stayton Town of Pelion Town of Hideout City of TacomaBlackfoot School District No. 55 City of Sublimity Town of PelzerTown of Hinckley City of TekoaBlaine County School District No. 61 City of Sumpter Town of Pendleton Town of Holden City of TeninoBliss Joint School District No. 234 City of Sutherlin Town of Perry Town of Howell City of TietonBonneville Joint School District No. 93 City of Sweet Home Town of Port Royal Town of Huntsville City of ToledoBoundary County School District No. 101 City of Talent Town of Prosperity Town of Joseph City of TonasketBruneau‐Grand View Joint School District City of Tangent Town of Ravenel Town of Junction City of ToppenishBuhl Joint School District No. 412 City of The Dalles Town of Reidville Town of Kanarraville City of TukwilaButte County Joint School District No. 111 City of Tigard Town of Ridge Spring Town of Kanosh City of TumwaterCaldwell School District No. 132 City of Tillamook Town of Ridgeland Town of Kingston City of Union GapCamas County School District No. 121 City of Toledo Town of Ridgeville Town of Koosharem City of University PlaceCambridge School District City of Troutdale Town of Ridgeway Town of Leeds City of VaderCascade School District No. 422 City of Tualatin Town of Saint Matthews Town of Levan City of VancouverCassia County Joint School District No. 151 City of Turner Town of Saint Stephen Town of Loa City of WaitsburgCastleford Joint School District No. 417 City of Ukiah Town of Salem Town of Manila City of Walla WallaChallis Joint School District No. 181 City of Umatilla Town of Salley Town of Mantua City of WapatoClark County School District No. 161 City of Union Town of SaludaTown of Marysvale City of WardenCoeur d'Alene School District No. 271 City of Unity Town of Santee Town of Meadow City of WashougalCottonwood Joint School District No. 242 City of Vale Town of Scranton Town of Minersville City of WenatcheeCouncil School District No. 13 City of Veneta Town of Seabrook Island Town of New Harmony City of West RichlandCuldesac Joint School District No. 342 City of Vernonia Town of Sellers Town of Newton City of WestportDietrich School District No. 314 City of Waldport Town of Sharon Town of Ophir City of White SalmonEmmett Independent School District No. 221 City of Wallowa Town of Six Mile Town of Orderville City of WinlockFiler School District No. 413 City of Warrenton Town of Snelling Town of Paradise City of WoodinvilleFirth School District No. 59 City of Wasco Town of Society Hill Town of Paragonah City of WoodlandFremont County School District No. 215 City of West Linn Town of South Congaree Town of Portage Utah City of Yakima/Yakima CountyFruitland School District No. 373 City of Westfir Town of Springdale Town of Randolph City of YelmGarden Valley School District City of Weston Town of St. George Town of Redmond City of ZillahGenesee Joint School District No. 282 City of Wheeler Town of St. Matthews Town of Rockville Consolidated Borough of Quil Ceda VillageGlenns Ferry Joint School District No. 192 City of Willamina Town of Stuckey Town of Rocky Ridge Grays Harbor Council of GovernmentsGooding Joint School District No. 231 City of Wilsonville Town of Sullivans Island Town of Rush Valley Town of AlmiraGrace Joint School District No. 148 City of Winston Town of Summerton Town of Scipio Town of Beaux Arts VillageHagerman Joint School District No. 233 City of Wood Village Town of Summerville Town of Scofield Town of BucodaHansen School District No. 415 City of Woodburn Town of Summit Town of Sigurd Town of CarbonadoHighland Joint School District No. 305 City of Yachats Town of Surfside Beach Town of Springdale Town of CathlametHomedale School District No. 370 City of Yamhill Town of Swansea Town of Stockton Town of Clyde HillHorseshoe Bend School District No. 73 City of Yoncalla Town of Timmonsville Town of Toquerville Town of ColtonIdaho Falls School District No. 91 Town of Bonanza Town of Trenton Town of Torrey Town of ConconullyIndependent School District of Boise City Town of Butte Falls Town of Turbeville Town of Trenton Town of ConcreteJefferson County School District No. 251 Town of Canyon City Town of Ulmer Town of Tropic Town of Coulee CityJerome Joint School District No. 261 Town of Lakeview Town of Varnville Town of Uintah Town of Coulee DamJoint School District No. 2 Town of Lexington Town of Wagener Town of Vernon Town of CoupevilleAppendix BPage 3 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonKamiah School District No. 304Higher EducationTown of Ward Town of Vineyard Town of CrestonKellogg Joint School District 391 Blue Mountain Community College Town of Ware Shoals Town of Virgin Town of CusickKendrick Joint School District No. 283 Central Oregon Community College Town of West Pelzer Town of Wales Town of DarringtonKimberly School District No. 414 Chemeketa Community College Town of West Union Town of Wallsburg Town of EatonvilleKootenai School District No. 274 Clackamas Community College Town of Whitmire Uintah Basin Association of Governments Town of Elmer CityKuna Joint School District No. 3 Clatsop Community College Town of WilliamstonHigher EducationTown of EndicottLake Pend Oreille School District No. 84 Columbia Gorge Community College Town of Williston College of Eastern Utah Town of FairfieldLakeland School District No. 272 Eastern Oregon University Town of Winnsboro Davis Applied Technology College Town of FarmingtonLapwai School District No. 341 Klamath Community College District Town of Yemassee Dixie Applied Technology College Town of Friday HarborLewiston Independent School District No. 1 Lane Community CollegeHigher EducationDixie State University Town of GarfieldMackay School District No. 182 Linn‐Benton Community College Aiken Technical College Mountainland Applied Technology College Town of HamiltonMadison School District No. 321 Mt. Hood Community College Beaufort Jasper Higher Education Commission Rocky Mountain University of Health Professions Town of HarrahMarsh Valley Joint School District No. 21 Oregon Coast Community College Central Carolina Technical College Salt Lake Community College Town of HattonMarsing Joint School District No. 363 Oregon Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development Clemson University Snow College Town of Hunts PointMcCall‐Donnelly Joint School District No. 421 Oregon Health and Science University Coastal Carolina University Southern Utah University Town of IndexMeadows Valley School District No. 11 Oregon Institute of Technology College of Charleston Tooele Applied Technology College Town of IoneMelba School District No. 136 Oregon State University Denmark Technical College Uintah Basin Applied Technology College Town of La ConnerMiddleton School District No. 134 Oregon State University, Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station Florence‐Darlington Technical College University of Utah Town of LaCrosseMidvale School District No. 433 Oregon University System Francis Marion University University of Utah Hospitals and Clinics Town of LamontMinidoka County School District No. 331 Portland Community College Greenville Technical College Utah State University Town of LatahMoscow School District No. 281 Portland State University Horry‐Georgetown Technical College Utah System of Higher Education Town of LindMountain Home School District No. 193 Reed College Lander University Utah Valley University Town of LymanMountain View School District No. 244 Rogue Community College Medical University of South Carolina Weber State University Town of MaldenMullan School District 392 Southern Oregon University Midlands Technical CollegeEducation (K‐12)Town of MansfieldMurtaugh Joint School District No. 418 Southern Oregon University Family Housing Northeastern Technical College Alpine School District Town of MarcusNampa Christian Schools Inc. Southwestern Oregon Community College Orangeburg‐Calhoun Technical College Beaver County School District Town of MetalineNampa School District No. 131 Tillamook Bay Community College Piedmont Technical College Box Elder School District Town of MillwoodNew Plymouth School District Treasure Valley Community College South Carolina State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education Cache County School District Town of NachesNez Perce Joint School District No. 302 Umpqua Community CollegeSouth Carolina State University Canyons School District Town of NespelemNorth Gem School District No. 149 University of Oregon South Carolina Technical College System Carbon School District Town of NorthportNotus School District Western Oregon University Spartanburg Community College Centro De La Familia De Utah Head Start Program School District Town of OakesdaleOneida County School District No. 351Education (K‐12)Technical College of the Lowcountry Daggett School District Town of OdessaOrofino Joint School District No. 171 Adel School District 21 The Citadel Davis School District Town of Pe EllParma School District No. 137 Adrian School District Tri‐County Technical College Duchesne County School District Town of PrescottPayette School District No. 371 Alsea School District No. 7J Trident Technical College Emery County School District Town of ReardanPlummer‐Worley Joint School District No. 44 Amity School District 4J University of South Carolina Freedom Preparatory Academy School District Town of RiversidePocatello‐Chubbuck School District No. 25 Annex School District 29 University of South Carolina, Aiken Garfield County School District Town of RockfordPost Falls School District No. 273 Arlington School District No. 3 University of South Carolina, Upstate Grand County School District Town of RosaliaPotlatch School District No. 285 Arock School District No. 81 Williamsburg Technical College Granite School District Town of RustonPreston Joint School District No. 201 Ashland School District No. 5 Winthrop University Iron County School District Town of SkykomishRichfield School District No. 316 Ashwood School District York Technical College Jordan School District Town of South Cle ElumRirie Joint School District No. 252 Astoria School District No. 1CEducation (K‐12)Juab School District Town of South PrairieRockland School District No. 382 Athena‐Weston School District No. 29RJ Abbeville County School District Kane County School District Town of SpangleSalmon River Joint School District No. 243 Baker School District No. 5J Aiken County Public Schools Logan City School District Town of SpringdaleSalmon School District No. 291 Bandon School District Allendale County School District Millard School District Town of St. JohnShelley School District No. 60 Banks School District No. 13 Anderson County School Districts 1 and 2 Career and Technology Center Morgan School District Town of SteilacoomShoshone Joint School District No. 312 Beaverton School District No. 48 Anderson School District No. 1 Mountainland Head Start Program School District Office Town of TwispSnake River School District Bend‐La Pine Public Schools Anderson School District No. 2 Murray City School District Town of UniontownSoda Springs Joint School District No. 150 Bethel School District No. 52 Anderson School District No. 3 Nebo School District Town of WashtucnaSouth Lemhi School District No. 292 Blachly School District Anderson School District No. 4 North Sanpete County School District Town of WatervilleSt. Maries Joint School District No. 41 Blachly School District 90 Anderson School District No. 5 North Sanpete School District Town of WaverlySugar‐Salem Joint District No. 322 Brookings Harbor School District Bamberg School District No. 1 North Summit School District Town of WilburSwan Valley Elementary School District No. 33 Camas Valley School District Bamberg School District No. 2 Ogden City School District Town of WilkesonSwan Valley School District No. 92 Canby School District No. 86 Barnwell School District No. 45 Park City School District Town of Wilson CreekTeton County School District No. 401 Cascade School District No. 5 Beaufort County School District Piute County School District Town of WinthropThree Creek Joint School District No. 416 Centennial School District No. 28J Berkeley County School District Provo City School District Town of WoodwayTroy School District No. 287 Central Curry School District No. 1Blackville‐Hilda Public Schools Rich County School District Town of YacoltTwin Falls School District No. 411 Central Linn School District Calhoun County School District Rich School District Town of Yarrow PointValley School District No. 262 Central Point School District No. 6 Charleston County School District Rural Utah Child Development Head Start Program School District OfficeHigher EducationVallivue School District No. 139 Central School District No. 13JCherokee County School District Salt Lake City School District Bates Technical CollegeVision Charter School District # 463 Clackamas Education Service District Chester County School District San Juan School DistrictBellevue Community CollegeWallace School District No. 393 Clatskanie School District No. 6J Chesterfield County School District Sevier School District Bellingham Technical CollegeWeiser School District No. 431 Colton School District No. 53 Clarendon County School District No. 1 South Sanpete School DistrictBig Bend Community CollegeWendell School District No. 232 Columbia Gorge Education Service District Clarendon County School District No. 2 South Summit School District Cascadia Community CollegeWest Bonner County School District No. 83 Condon School District No. 25J Clarendon County School District No. 3 Suu Head Start Program School District Central Washington UniversityWest Jefferson School District No. 253 Coos Bay School District No. 9 Clover School District No. 2 Thomas Edison Charter Schools Centralia CollegeWest Side School District No. 202 Coquille School District No. 8Colleton County School District Tintic School District Clark CollegeWhitepine Joint School District No. 288 Corbett School District No. 39 Darlington County School District Tooele County School District Clover Park Technical CollegeWilder School District No. 133 Corvallis School District No. 509J Delta R‐V School District Uintah School District Columbia Basin Community CollegeSpecial DistrictCove School District No. 15 Dillon County School District No. 1 Wasatch County School District Community Colleges of SpokaneAda County Emergency Medical Services District Crane Elementary School District Dillon County School District No. 2 Washington County School District Eastern Washington UniversityAda County Highway District Creswell School District No. 40 Dillon County School District No. 3 Wayne County School District Edmonds Community CollegeAdams County Recreation District Crook County School District Dillon County School District No. 4 Weber School District Everett Community CollegeAhsahka Water and Sewer District Crow‐Applegate‐Lorane School District No. 66 Diocese Of Charleston SchoolsSpecial DistrictEvergreen State CollegeAlbion Highway District Culver School District No. 4 Dorchester School District No. 2 Ash Creek Special Service District Grays Harbor CollegeAlpine Meadows Water and Sewer District Dallas School District No. 2 Dorchester School District No. 4 Ashley Valley Water and Sewer Improvement District Green River Community CollegeAmerican Falls Free Library District David Douglas School District No. 40 Edgefield County Schools Ballard Water and Sewer Improvement District Highline Community CollegeAmerican Falls Housing Authority Dayton School District No. 8 Fairfield County School District Bear Lake Special Service DistrictLake Washington Institute of TechnologyAtlanta Highway District Dayville School District No. 16J Florence County School District No. 1 Bear River Water Conservancy District Lower Columbia CollegeAvery Water and Sewer District Douglas County School District Florence County School District No. 2 Benchland Water District Northwest Indian CollegeAvondale Irrigation District Douglas County School District No. 4 Florence County School District No. 3 Benson Culinary Water Improvement District Olympic CollegeBayview Water and Sewer District Douglas Education Service District Florence County School District No. 4 Bona Vista Water Improvement District Peninsula CollegeBear Lake County Library District Dufur School District No. 29 Florence County School District No. 5 Cache Mosquito Abatement District Pierce CollegeBench Sewer District Eagle Point School District No. 9 Ft. Mill School District No. 4 Cache Valley Transit District Renton Technical CollegeBenewah County Free Library District Echo School District No. 5 Georgetown County School District Canyonlands Health Care Special Service District Seattle Community Colleges District VIBig Canyon Fire District Elgin School District Greenville County School District Carbon County Housing Authority Shoreline Community CollegeBlaine County Housing Authority Elkton School District No. 34 Greenwood School District No. 50 Carbon County Municipal Building Authority Skagit Valley CollegeBlaine County Recreation District Enterprise School District No. 21 Greenwood School District No. 52 Carbon County Recreation Transportation Special Service District South Puget Sound Community CollegeBliss Fire District Estacada School District No. 108 Hampton County School District No. 2 Carbon Water Conservancy District Tacoma Community CollegeBoise Basin Library District Eugene School District No. 4J Hampton School District No. 1 Castle Valley Special Service District University of WashingtonBoise City/Ada County Housing Authority Falls City School District Horry County Schools Cedar City Housing Authority Walla Walla Community CollegeBoise‐Kung Irrigation District Fern Ridge School District No. 28J Jasper County School District Cedar Mountain Fire Protection District Washington State Board for Community and Technical CollegesBonneville County Fire District No. 1 Forest Grove School District John de la Howe School District Cedarview‐Montwell Special Service District Washington State Higher Education Facilities AuthorityBruneau Valley District Library Fossil School District 21J Kershaw County School District Central Davis County Sewer District Washington State Student Achievement CouncilAppendix BPage 4 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonBruneau Water and Sewer District Gaston School District 511 J Lancaster County School District Central Iron County Water Conservancy District Washington State UniversityBuhl Highway District Gervais School District Laurens County School District No. 55 Central Utah Water Conservancy District Washington State University, VancouverBuhl Rural Fire Protection District Gladstone School District Laurens County School District No. 56 Central Weber Sewer Improvement District Wenatchee Valley CollegeBurley Highway District Glendale School District No. 77 Lee County School District Charleston Water Conservancy District Western Washington UniversityCaldwell Housing Authority Glide School District Legacy Charter Schools Copperton Improvement District Whatcom Community CollegeCanyon Highway District No. 4 Grant County Education Service District Lexington County School District No. 1 Cottonwood Improvement District Yakima Valley Community CollegeCascade Rural Fire District Grant School District No. 3 Lexington County School District No. 2 Davis Community Housing AuthorityEducation (K‐12)Castleford Rural Fire District Grants Pass School District No. 7Lexington County School District No. 3 Davis County Housing Authority Aberdeen School District No. 5Central Fire District Greater Albany Public School District 8J Lexington County School District No. 4 Davis‐Salt Lake Aerial Spray Authority Adna School District No. 226Central Orchards Sewer District Gresham‐Barlow School District Lexington‐Richland Counties School District No. 5 Duchesne County Upper Country Water Improvement District Almira School District No. 17Central Shoshone County Water District Harney County School District No. 3 Marion County School District Duchesne County Water Conservancy District Anacortes School District No. 103Clark County District Library Harney Education Service District Marion County School District No. 7 Emery County Housing Authority Arlington Public SchoolsClarkia Free Library District Harper School District No. 66 Marlboro County School District Emery County Municipal Building Authority Asotin‐Anatone School DistrictClarkia Highway District Harrisburg School District No. 7 McCormick County School District Emery County Special Service District No. 1 Auburn School District No. 408Clearwater Free Library District Helix School District No. 1‐R Newberry County School District Emery Water Conservancy District Bainbridge Island School District No. 303Clearwater Highway District Hermiston School District Oconee County School District Emigration Improvement District Battle Ground School District No. 119Clearwater Soil and Water Conservation District High Desert Education Service District Orangeburg Consolidated School District Four Fruitland Special Service District Bellevue Christian School DistrictClearwater Water District Hillsboro School District No. 1J Orangeburg County Consolidated School District No. 3 Garden City Fire District Bellevue School District No. 405Consolidated Free Library District Hood River County School District Orangeburg County Consolidated School District No. 5 Grand County Housing Authority Bellingham School District No. 501Cottonwood Highway District Huntington School District No. 16J Pickens County School District Granger‐Hunter Improvement DistrictBenge School District No. 122Custer Soil and Water Conservation District Imbler School District No. 11 Richland County School District No. 1 Heber Valley Special Service District Bethel School District No. 403Dietrich Fire District InterMountain Education Service District Richland County School District No. 2 Hooper Water Improvement District Bickleton School DistrictDietrich Highway District Ione School District R2 Rock Hill School District No. 3 Jensen Water Improvement District Blaine School District No. 503Doumecq Highway District Jackson County School District No. 9 Saluda School District No. 1 Johnson Water Improvement District Boistfort School District No. 234Downey Swan Lake Highway District Jackson Education Service District South Carolina Public Charter School District Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District Bremerton School DistrictDry Creek Cemetery Maintenance District Jefferson County School District No. 509‐J Spartanburg County School District No. 1 Jordanelle Special Service District Brewster School District No. 111Eagle Fire Protection District Jefferson School District Spartanburg County School District No. 2 Juab Special Service Fire District Bridgeport School District No. 75Eagle Sewer District Jewell School District No. 8 Spartanburg County School District No. 3 Kane County Water Conservancy DistrictBrinnon School District No. 46East Bonner County Free Library District John Day School District No. 3 Spartanburg County School District No. 4 Kearns Improvement District Burlington‐Edison School District No. 100East Bonner County Library District Jordan Valley School District No. 3 Spartanburg County School District No. 5 Lake Point Improvement District Camas School DistrictEast Greenacres Irrigation District Joseph School District No. 6Spartanburg County School District No. 6 Logan‐Cache Airport Authority Cape Flattery School District No. 401Eastern Idaho Public Health District Junction City School District No. 69 Spartanburg County School District No. 7 Maeser Water and Sewer Improvement District Capital Region Educational Service District No. 113Eastern Idaho Regional Wastewater Authority Klamath County School District Sumter School District Magna Mosquito Abatement District Carbonado Historical School District No. 19Elk River Free Library District Klamath Falls City Schools Sumter School District No. 17 Magna Water District Cascade Christian SchoolsElmore Soil and Water Conservation District Knappa School District Sumter School District No. 2 Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake and Sandy Cascade School District No. 228Fenn Highway District La Grande School District No. 1 Union County School District Midvalley Improvement District Cashmere School District No. 222Ferdinand Highway District Lake County School District No. 7 Ware Shoals School District No. 51 Midway Sanitation District Castle Rock School District No. 401Fish Haven Mosquito Abatement District Lake Ed Service District Williamsburg County Schools Milford Area Healthcare Service District Central Kitsap School District No. 401Fremont County District Library Lake Oswego School District No. 7J Williston School District No. 29 Moab Mosquito Abatement District Central Valley School District No. 356Friedman Memorial Airport Authority Lakeview School District No. 7 York School District No. 1 Moab Valley Fire Protection District Centralia School District No. 401Garden Valley District Library Lane Education Service DistrictSpecial DistrictMountain Green Sewer Improvement District Chehalis School District No. 302Garden Valley Fire Protection District Lebanon Community School District No. 9 Abbeville Housing Authority Mountain Regional Water Special Service District Cheney School District No. 360Garden Valley Recreation District Lincoln County School DistrictAiken Housing Authority Mountain View Special Service District Chewelah School District No. 36Gateway Fire Protection District Linn‐Benton‐Lincoln Education Service District Anderson Housing Authority Mt. Olympus Improvement District Chief Leschi School SystemGem County Fire Protection District Long Creek School District No. 17 Atlantic Beach Housing Authority North Davis County Sewer District Chimacum School District No. 49Gem County Mosquito Abatement District Lowell School District No. 71 Beaufort Housing Authority North Davis Fire District Clarkston School District No. J250‐185Glenns Ferry Highway District Mapleton School District No. 32 Beaufort‐Jasper Water and Sewer Authority North Emery Water Users Special Service District Cle Elum‐Roslyn School DistrictGolden Gate Highway District No. 3 Marcola School District No. 79J Beech Island Rural Community Water District North Fork Special Services District Clover Park School District No. 400Gooding County Memorial Hospital District McKenzie School District Belton‐Honea Path Water Authority North Pointe Solid Waste Special Service District Colfax School District No. 300Grace District Library McMinnville School District No. 40 Bennettsville Housing Authority North Summit Fire District College Place School District No. 250Grangeville Highway District Medford School District No. 549C Berea Public Service District North Tooele County Fire Protection District Colton School District No. 306Granite Reeder Water and Sewer District Milton‐Freewater School District No. 7 Berkeley County Water and Sanitation Authority North Utah Water Conservancy District Columbia School District No. 206Greater Boise Auditorium District Mitchell School District No. 55 Big Creek Water and Sewerage District North View Fire District Columbia School District No. 206, Stevens CountyGreater Middleton Parks and Recreation District Molalla River School District Bluffton Township Fire District Ogden Housing Authority Columbia School District No. 400Greater Swan Valley Fire Protection District No. 2 Monument School District Boiling Springs Fire District, Greenville County Ouray Park Water Improvement District Colville School District No. 115Groveland Water and Sewer District Morrow County School DistrictBroad Creek Public Service District Park City Fire Service District Concrete School District No. 11Harbor View Estates Water and Sewer District Mt. Angel School District Buffalo‐Mt. Pisgah Fire Protection District Price River Water Improvement District Conway Consolidated School District No. 317Hayden Lake Irrigation District Multnomah Education Service District Consortium Burton Fire District Provo Housing Authority Cosmopolis School DistrictHayden Lake Recreational Water and Sewer District Myrtle Point School District Central Midlands Regional Transit Authority Rockville/Springdale Fire Protection District Coulee‐Hartline School District No. 151Hillsdale Highway District Neah‐Kah‐Nie School District No. 56 Charleston Area Regional Transportation Authority Roosevelt City Housing Authority Coupeville School District No. 204Homedale Highway District Nestucca Valley School District No. 101 Charleston County Aviation Authority Salt Lake City Housing Authority Crescent School DistrictHoo Doo Water and Sewer District New Hope Christian Schools Charleston County Housing and Redevelopment Authority Salt Lake City Mosquito Abatement District Creston School District No. 73Horseshoe Bend Fire Protection District Newberg School District No. 29J Charleston Housing Authority Salt Lake County Housing Authority Curlew School District No‐ 50Idaho Soil and Water Conservation District North Bend School District No. 13 Charleston Naval Complex Redevelopment Authority Sandy Suburban Improvement District Cusick School DistrictIndian Valley Rural Fire District North Central Education Service District Charleston Soil and Water Conservation District Scofield Reservoir Special Service District Darrington School District No. 330Iona‐Bonneville Sewer District North Clackamas School District No. 12 Cheraw Housing Authority Sevier County Special Service District No. 1 Davenport School District No. 207Island Park Fire District North Douglas School District No. 22 Chester Housing Authority Skyline Mountain Special Service District Dayton School District No. 2Jerome Highway District North Lake School District Chester Metropolitan District Snyderville Basin Special Recreation District Deer Park School District No. 414Jerome Recreation District North Marion School District No. 15 Chester Sewer District Snyderville Basin Water Reclamation District Dieringer School DistrictJerome Rural Fire District No. 1 North Santiam School District No. 29 Coast Regional Transportation Authority Solid Waste Special Service District No. 1 Dixie School DistrictKamiah Fire Protection District North Wasco County School District No. 21 Columbia Housing Authority South Davis Sewer District East Valley School District No. 361Kamiah Highway District Northwest Regional Education Service District Conway Housing Authority South Davis Water District East Valley School District No. 361, Spokane CountyKetchum Rural Fire Protection District Nyssa School District No. 26 Daniel Morgan Water District South Ogden Conservation District East Valley School District No. 90, Yakima CountyKidder Harris Highway District Oakland School District Darlington County Fire District South Salt Lake Valley Mosquito Abatement District Eastmont School District No. 206Kingston Water District Oakridge School District No. 76 Darlington County Water and Sewer Authority South Summit Fire Protection District Eatonville School District No. 404Kootenai County Water District No. 1 Ontario School District No. 8C Darlington Housing Authority South Utah Valley Solid Waste District Edmonds School District No. 15Kootenai Ponderay Sewer District Oregon City School District No. 62 Donalds‐Due West Water and Sewer Authority South Valley Sewer District Educational Service District No. 112Kootenai‐Shoshone Soil and Water Conservation District Oregon Trail School District No. 46 Dorchester County Sales Tax Transportation Authority Southeastern Utah Housing Authority Ellensburg School District No. 401Kuna Library District Paisley School District No. 11 Dorchester County Water Authority Spanish Valley Water and Sewer Improvement District Elma School District No. 68Laclede Water District Parkrose School District No. 3 Duncan Chapel Fire District St. George Housing Authority Endicott School District No. 308Lakes Highway District Pendleton School District No. 16 Easley Housing Authority Stansbury Park Improvement District Entiat School District No. 127Latah County Library District Perrydale School District No. 21J Easley‐Central Water District Strawberry Electric Service District Enumclaw School District No. 216Latah Soil and Water Conservation District Philomath School District No. 17J East Richland County Public Service District Sugar House Park Authority Ephrata School District No. 165Lemhi Soil and Water Conservation District Phoenix‐Talent School District Edgefield County Water and Sewer Authority Tabby Valley Park Special Service District Evaline School District No. 36Lewiston Orchards Irrigation District Pilot Rock School District No. 2 Florence Housing Authority Taylorsville‐Bennion Improvement District Everett School District No. 2Lewiston‐Nez Perce County Regional Airport Authority Pine Eagle School District No. 61 Fort Mill Housing Authority Thompson Special Service District Evergreen School District No. 114, Clark CountyLincoln County Recreation District Pinehurst School District Fripp Island Public Service District Timpanogos Special Service District Evergreen School District No. 205Little Blacktail Ranch Water District Pleasant Hill School District Gaffney Housing Authority Tooele County Housing Authority Federal Way Public SchoolsLittle Wood River Library District Plush School District 18 Gaston Rural Community Water District Tooele County Recreation Special Service District Ferndale School District No. 502Lizard Butte Library District Port Orford‐Langlois School District No. 2CJ Georgetown County Water and Sewer District Tridell‐Lapoint Water Improvement District Fife School District No. 417Lost River Highway District Portland Public School District No. 1 Georgetown Housing Authority Uintah Animal Control and Shelter Special Service District Finley School DistrictM&T Water and Sewer District Powers School District No. 31 Gilbert‐Summit Rural Water District Uintah County Municipal Building Authority Franklin Pierce School District No. 402Mackay Free Library District Prairie City School District No. 4 Grand Strand Water and Sewer Authority Uintah Fire Suppression Special Service District Freeman School District No. 358Madison Library District Prospect School District Greenville Arena District Uintah Health Care Special Service District Garfield School District No. 302Appendix BPage 5 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonMarsing Rural Fire District Rainier School District No. 13 Greenville County Recreation District Uintah Highlands Water and Sewer Improvement District Glenwood School DistrictMcCall Fire Protection District Redmond School District No. 2J Greenville County Redevelopment Authority Uintah Mosquito Abatement District Goldendale School DistrictMcCall Memorial Hospital District Reedsport School District No. 105 Greenville Housing Authority Uintah Recreation District Grand Coulee Dam School DistrictMeridian Cemetery Maintenance District Region 9 Education Service District Greenville Transit Authority Uintah Transportation Special Service District Grandview School District No. 200Meridian Library District Reynolds School District No. 7 Greenwood Metropolitan District Uintah Water Conservancy District Granger School District No. 204Meridian Rural Fire Protection District Riddle School District No. 70 Greer Housing Authority Unified Fire Authority Granite Falls School District No. 332Mica Kidd Island Fire Protection District Riverdale School District No. 51J Hartsville Housing Authority Utah County Housing Authority Grapeview School District No. 54Middleton Rural Fire District Rogue River School District No. 35Hilton Head No. 1 Public Service District Utah Paiute Housing Authority Great Northern School DistrictMidvale Fire Protection District Roseburg Public Schools Holly Springs Fire‐Rescue District Utah Transit Authority Green Mountain School District No. 103Minidoka County Fire Protection District Salem‐Keizer Public School District No. 24J Homeland Park Water and Sewer District Utah Valley Dispatch Special Service District Griffin School District No. 324Minidoka County Highway District Santiam Canyon School District No. 129J James Island Public Service District Wasatch County Fire District Harrington Public SchoolsMoreland Water and Sewer District Santiam Christian Schools Kingstree Housing Authority Wasatch Front Waste and Recycling District Highland School District No. 203Mountain Home Highway District Scappoose School District No. 1J Lady's Island‐St. Helena Fire District Wasatch Integrated Waste Management District Highline School District No. 401Mountain Rides Transportation Authority Scio School District No. 95C Lake City Housing Authority Washington County Water Conservancy District Hockinson School DistrictNampa and Meridian Irrigation District Seaside School District Lancaster County Water and Sewer District Waste Management Service District No. 5 Hood Canal School District No. 404Nampa Highway District No. 1 Sheridan School District No. 48J Lancaster Housing Authority Weber Basin Water Conservancy District Hoquiam School District No. 28Nampa Housing Authority Sherman County School District Lancaster Soil and Water Conservation District Weber Fire District Inchelium School District No. 70New Plymouth Fire District Sherwood School District No. 88J Laurens Housing Authority Weber Mosquito Abatement District Issaquah School District No. 411North Bingham County District Library Silver Falls School District No. 4J Lexington County Health Services District, Inc. Weber‐Box Elder Conservation District Kahlotus School District No. 56North Custer Hospital District Sisters School District No. 6 Liberty‐Chesnee‐Fingerville Water District Wellsville‐Mendon Conservancy District Kalama School District No. 402North Kootenai Water and Sewer District Siuslaw School District No. 97J Local Housing Authority White City Water Improvement District Keller School District No. 3North Lake Recreational Sewer and Water District South Coast Education Service District, Region No. 7 Lowcountry Regional Transportation Authority Woodruff Fire District Kelso School District No. 458North Latah County Highway District South Lane School District No. 45J3 Lugoff‐Elgin Water AuthorityStateKennewick School District No. 17Northern Lakes Fire District South Umpqua School District No. 19Marion Housing Authority State Of Utah Kent School District No. 415Northside Fire District South Wasco County School District No. 1Marlboro County Housing Authority Utah Department of Administrative Services Kettle Falls School District No. 212Notus‐Parma Highway District No. 2 Southern Oregon Education Service District McColl Housing Authority Utah Department of Health Kiona‐Benton City School District No. 52Oakley Highway District Spray School District No. 1 Medical University Hospital Authority Utah State Legislature Kittitas School DistrictOakley Library District Springfield School District No. 19 Metropolitan Sewer Sub‐District Utah State Treasurer Klickitat School District No. 402Ola District Library St. Helens School District No. 502 Mitford Water and Sewer DistrictTribalLa Center School DistrictOneida County Fire District St. Paul School District No. 45 Mullins Housing Authority Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Reservation La Conner School District No. 311Oregon Trail Recreation District Stanfield School District No. 61 Murrells Inlet‐Garden City Fire District Kanosh Band of the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah LaCrosse School DistrictOutlet Bay Water and Sewer District Sutherlin School District No. 130 Myrtle Beach Air Force Base Redevelopment Authority Koosharem Band of the Paiute Indian Tribe Lake Chelan School District No. 129Panhandle Health District Sweet Home School District No. 55 Myrtle Beach Housing Authority Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation Lake Quinault School District No. 97Parma Rural Fire Protection District Three Rivers School District Newberry County Water and Sewer Authority Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation Housing Authority Lake Stevens School District No. 4Pine Ridge Water and Sewer District Tigard‐Tualatin School District No. 23J Newberry Housing Authority Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah Lake Washington School District No. 414Pinehurst Water District Tillamook School District No. 9 North Charleston Housing Authority Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians Lakewood School District No. 306Pioneer Irrigation District Ukiah School District 80 R North Charleston Sewer District Ute Indian Tribe Lamont School DistrictPlacerville Fire Protection District Umatilla School District No. 6 North Greenville Fire DistrictLiberty School District No. 362Pocatello Housing Authority Union School District 5 Oconee County Joint Regional Sewer AuthorityLind School DistrictPocatello‐Chubbuck Auditorium District Vale School District No. 84 Parker Sewer and Fire SubdistrictLongview School District No. 122Portneuf District Library Vernonia School District No. 47J Patriots Point Development AuthorityLoon Lake School District No. 183Post Falls Highway District Wallowa School District No. 12 Pee Dee Regional Airport DistrictLopez Island School District No. 144Power County Highway District Warrenton‐Hammond School District No. 30 Pee Dee Regional Transportation AuthorityLyle School District No‐ 406Prairie Highway District West Linn‐Wilsonville School District Piedmont Public Service DistrictLynden School District No. 504Prairie‐River Library District Willamette Education Service District Pioneer Rural Water DistrictMabton School District No. 120Progressive Irrigation District Willamina School District No. 30J Powdersville Water DistrictMansfield School District No. 207Raft River Highway District Winston‐Dillard School District No. 116 Richland‐Lexington Airport DistrictManson School DistrictRapid River Water and Sewer District Woodburn School District No. 103 Richland‐Lexington Riverbanks Park DistrictMary M. Knight School DistrictRichfield District Library Yamhill‐Carlton School District No. 1Rock Hill Housing AuthorityMary Walker School District No. 207Riverside Independent Water District Yoncalla School District No. 32 Saluda County Water and Sewer AuthorityMarysville School District No. 25Rock Creek Fire DistrictSpecial DistrictSandy Springs Water DistrictMcCleary School District No. 65Rockland Rural Fire District Adair Rural Fire Protection District Santee Fire Service DistrictMead School District No. 354Rogerson Water District Amity Fire District Santee Wateree Regional Transportation AuthorityMedical Lake School District No. 326Ross Point Water District Applegate Valley Fire District No. 9 Sheldon Township Fire DistrictMercer Island School District No. 400Sagle Fire District Arch Cape Sanitary District Slater‐Marietta Fire DistrictMeridian School District No. 505Salmon River Clinic Hospital District Arch Cape Water District South Carolina Housing Authority Bond CouncilMethow Valley School DistrictSam Owen Fire District Arnold Irrigation District South Carolina Public Employee Benefit AuthorityMonroe School District No. 103Santa‐Fernwood Water and Sewer District Aumsville Rural Fire District South Carolina Regional Housing Authority No. 1Montesano School District No. 66Schweitzer Fire‐Rescue District Baker County Library District South Carolina Regional Housing Authority No. 3Morton School District No. 214Settlers Irrigation District Baker Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina State Education Assistance AuthorityMoses Lake School District No. 161Shelley/Firth Fire District Baker Valley Soil and Water Conservation District South Carolina State Fiscal Accountability AuthorityMossyrock School District No. 206Shoshone City & Rural Fire District Bandon Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina State Housing Finance and Development AuthorityMt. Adams School District No. 209Shoshone County Fire Protection District No. 2 Barlow Water Improvement District South Carolina State Ports AuthorityMt. Baker School District No. 507Shoshone Highway District No. 2 Bay Area Hospital District South Greenville Fire DistrictMt. Vernon School District No. 320South Bannock Library District Bend Parks and Recreation District South Island Public Service DistrictMukilteo School District No. 6South Bingham Soil Conservation District Beverly Beach Water District Southside Rural Community Water DistrictNaches Valley School District No. 3South Boundary Fire Protection District Black Butte Ranch Rural Fire Protection District Spartanburg Housing AuthorityNapavine School District No. 14South Custer Fire District Blue Mountain Hospital District Spartanburg Regional Health Services DistrictNaselle‐Grays River Valley School District No.165South Fork Coeur d'Alene River Sewer District Blue River Water District St. Andrews Public Service District South CarolinaNespelem School District No. 14South Latah Highway District Boardman Park and Recreation District St. John's Fire DistrictNewport School District No. 56‐415Southside Water and Sewer District Boardman Rural Fire Protection District Starr‐Iva Water and Sewer DistrictNine Mile Falls School District No. 325/179Southwestern Idaho Cooperative Housing Authority Boring Water District No. 24 Startex‐Jackson‐Wellford‐Duncan Water DistrictNooksack Valley School District No. 506St. Maries Fire Protection District Boulder Creek Retreat Special Road District Sumter Housing AuthorityNorth Beach School District No. 64Star Joint Fire District Brownsville Rural Fire District Talatha Rural Community Water DistrictNorth Franklin School District No. 51Star Sewer and Water District Buell‐Red Prairie Water District Taylors Fire and Sewer DistrictNorth Kitsap School District No. 400Sun Valley Water and Sewer District Bunker Hill Sanitary District Three Rivers Solid Waste AuthorityNorth Mason School DistrictSunset Heights Water District Burlington Water District Tigerville Fire DistrictNorth Thurston Public SchoolsTarghee Regional Public Transit Authority Camellia Park Sanitary District Tri‐County Solid Waste AuthorityNorthport School District No. 211Targhee Regional Public Transportation Authority Cannon Beach Rural Fire Protection District Union Housing AuthorityNorthshore School District No. 417Teton County Fire Protection District Central Lincoln People's Utility District Valley Public Service AuthorityOak Harbor School District No. 201Three Creek Highway District Central Oregon Irrigation District Waccamaw Regional Transportation AuthorityOakesdale School District No. 324Three Mile Water District Central Oregon Park and Recreation District Wedgefield Stateburg Water DistrictOakville School District No. 400Timberlake Fire Protection District Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority West Anderson Water DistrictOcean Beach School District No. 101Twin Falls Highway District Charleston Fire District Westview‐Fairforest Fire DistrictOcosta School District No. 172Twin Falls Housing Authority Charleston Sanitary District Whitney Fire Protection DistrictOdessa School District No. 105Twin Falls Rural Fire Protection District Chehalem Park and Recreation District Williamsburg County Transit AuthorityOkanogan School District No. 105Twin Ridge Rural Fire District Chenowith Water Public Utility District Williamsburg County Water and Sewer AuthorityOlympia School District No. 111Union Independent Highway District Chiloquin‐Agency Lake Rural Fire Protection District Woodruff Housing AuthorityOlympic Educational Service DistrictUpper Fords Creek Rural Fire District Christmas Valley Domestic Water Supply District Woodruff‐Roebuck Water DistrictOmak School District No. 19Warm Lake Recreational Water District Christmas Valley Park and Recreation District York County Natural Gas AuthorityOnalaska School District No. 300Wendell Highway District Clackamas County Fire District No. 1StateOnion Creek School District No. 30West Boise Sewer District Clackamas County Housing Authority Santee‐Lynches Regional Council of GovernmentsOrcas Island School District No. 137West Bonner Library District Clackamas County Soil and Water Conservation District South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental ControlOrchard Prairie School District No. 123West Bonner Water and Sewer District Clatskanie Park and Recreation District South Carolina Department of Mental HealthOrient School District No. 65Appendix BPage 6 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonWest Pend Oreille Fire District Clatskanie People's Utility District South Carolina Department of RevenueOroville School District No. 410Western Ada Recreation District Clatskanie Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina General Services DivisionOrting School District No. 344Western Elmore County Recreation District Clatsop Care Center Health District South Carolina Office of Regulatory StaffOthello School DistrictWilder Irrigation District Clatsop County Housing Authority South Carolina State Budget and Control BoardPalisades School District No. 102Wilder Public Library District Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District South Carolina State Treasurer's OfficePalouse School District No. 301Wilder Rural Fire Protection District Coburg Rural Fire Protection District State Of South CarolinaPasco School District No. 1Wilderness Ranch Fire Protection District Colton Fire DistrictTownship Pateros School DistrictWinona Highway District Colton Water District Township of Grand MeadowPaterson School District No. 50Worley Fire District Columbia Corridor Drainage Districts Joint Contracting AuthorityTribalPe Ell School District No. 301Worley Highway District Columbia Health District Catawba Indian NationPeninsula School DistrictStateColumbia Improvement DistrictPioneer School District No. 402Idaho Department of Administration Columbia River People's Utility DistrictPomeroy School District No. 110Idaho Department of Health and Welfare Columbia Soil and Water Conservation DistrictPort Angeles School District No. 121State Of Idaho Coos County Airport DistrictPort Townsend School District No. 50TribalCoos County Library Service DistrictPrescott School District No. 402‐37Coeur d'Alene Tribe Coquille Indian Housing AuthorityPride Prep SchoolsKootenai Tribe of Idaho Coquille Valley Hospital DistrictProsser School District No. 116Nez Perce Tribal Enterprises Corbett Water DistrictPuget Sound Educational Service DistrictNez Perce Tribe Corvallis Rural Fire Protection DistrictPullman School District No. 267Shoshone‐Bannock Tribes Cove Rural Fire Protection DistrictPuyallup School District No. 3Crooked River Ranch Rural Fire Protection DistrictQueets‐Clearwater School District No. 20Crooked River Ranch Special Road DistrictQuilcene School District No. 48Curry Health DistrictQuillayute Valley School District No. 402Curry Public Library DistrictQuincy School District No. 144Dallas Cemetery District No. 4Rainier School District No. 307Dean Minard Water DistrictRaymond School District No. 116Dee Rural Fire Protection DistrictReardan‐Edwall School DistrictDeschutes County 911 Service DistrictRenton School District No. 403Deschutes County Rural Fire District No. 1Republic School DistrictDeschutes Valley Water DistrictRichland School District No. 400Devils Lake Water Improvement DistrictRidgefield School District No. 122Dexter Rural Fire Protection DistrictRitzville School DistrictDouglas County Fire District No. 2Riverside School DistrictDouglas County Housing AuthorityRiverview School District No. 407Douglas Soil and Water Conservation DistrictRochester School DistrictDrakes Crossing Rural Fire Protection DistrictRosalia School District No. 320Dufur Recreation DistrictRoyal School DistrictEagle Valley Soil and Water Conservation DistrictSan Juan Island School District No. 149East Fork Irrigation DistrictSatsop School District No. 104East Multnomah Soil and Water Conservation DistrictSeattle Public SchoolsEast Umatilla County Health DistrictSedro‐Woolley School District No. 101East Valley Water DistrictSelah School District No. 119Echo Rural Fire DistrictSelkirk School District No. 70Elsie‐Vinemaple Rural Fire Protection District No. 11Sequim School District No. 323Emerald People's Utility DistrictShaw Island School District No. 10Estacada Rural Fire District No. 69Shelton School District No. 309Fairview Water DistrictShoreline School District No. 412Falcon Cove Beach Water DistrictSkykomish School DistrictFarmers Irrigation DistrictSnohomish School District No. 201Gardiner Sanitary DistrictSnoqualmie Valley School District No. 410Gaston Rural Fire DistrictSoap Lake School District No. 156Gates Rural Fire Protection DistrictSouth Bend School District No. 118Gearhart Rural Fire Protection DistrictSouth Kitsap School District No. 402Glendale Rural Fire Protection DistrictSouth Whidbey School District No. 206Gleneden Sanitary DistrictSouthside School DistrictGoshen Fire DistrictSpokane Public SchoolsGovernment Camp Sanitary DistrictSprague School DistrictGrand Ronde Sanitary DistrictSt. John School District No. 322Grant County Transportation DistrictStanwood‐Camano School District No. 401Grant Soil and Water Conservation DistrictSteilacoom Historical School District No. 1Grants Pass Irrigation DistrictSteptoe School District No. 304Green Sanitary DistrictStevenson‐Carson School District No. 303Hahlen Road Special DistrictSultan School District No. 311Halsey‐Shedd Rural Fire Protection DistrictSummit Valley School District 202Hamlet Rural Fire Protection DistrictSumner School District No. 320Harbor Sanitary DistrictSunnyside School District No. 201Harbor Water Public Utility DistrictTacoma School District No. 10Harney District HospitalTaholah School District No. 77Harney Soil and Water Conservation DistrictTahoma School District No. 409Harriman Rural Fire Protection DistrictTekoa School District No. 265Hazeldell Rural Fire Protection DistrictTenino School District No. 402Hebo Joint Water and Sewer AuthorityThorp School District No. 400Heceta Water DistrictToledo School District No. 237Hermiston Cemetery DistrictTonasket School DistrictHermiston Fire and Emergency Services DistrictToppenish School District No. 202Hermiston Irrigation DistrictTouchet School District No. 300Hood River County Library DistrictToutle Lake School District No. 130Hood River County Transportation DistrictTrout Lake School District No. R‐400Hood River Valley Parks and Recreation DistrictTukwila School District No. 406Hoodland Fire District No. 74Tumwater School District No. 33Hubbard Rural Fire Protection DistrictUnion Gap School District No. 2Ice Fountain Water DistrictUniversity Place School District No. 83Illinois Valley Rural Fire Protection DistrictValley School DistrictIone Rural Fire Protection DistrictValley School District No. 70Irrigon Community Park and Recreation Maintenance DistrictVancouver School District No. 37Jackson County Airport AuthorityVashon Island School District No. 402Jackson County Fire District No. 3Wahkiakum School District No. 200Jackson County Fire District No. 5Wahluke School District No. 73Jackson County Housing AuthorityWaitsburg School DistrictJackson County Library DistrictWalla Walla School District No. 140Jackson County Vector Control DistrictWapato School District No. 207Jackson Soil and Water Conservation DistrictWarden School District No. 146‐161Jefferson Rural Fire Protection DistrictWashington Schools Risk Management PoolJohn Day/Canyon City Parks and Recreation DistrictWashington State Educational Service DistrictAppendix BPage 7 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonJunction City Rural Fire Protection DistrictWashougal School DistrictJuniper Flat Rural Fire Protection DistrictWashtucna School DistrictKeating Soil and Water Conservation DistrictWaterville School District No. 209Keizer Rural Fire Protection DistrictWellpinit School DistrictKeno Fire Protection DistrictWenatchee School District No. 246Kernville‐Gleneden Beach‐Lincoln Beach Water DistrictWest Valley School District No. 208, Yakima CountyKlamath County Fire District No. 1West Valley School District No. 363, Spokane CountyKlamath County Library Service DistrictWhite Pass School District No. 303Klamath Housing AuthorityWhite River School District No. 416Klamath Irrigation DistrictWhite Salmon Valley School District No. 405‐17Klamath Vector Control DistrictWilbur School District No. 200La Grande Rural Fire Protection DistrictWillapa Valley School District No. 160La Pine Park and Recreation DistrictWilson Creek School DistrictLa Pine Rural Fire Protection DistrictWinlock School District No. 232La Pine Water DistrictWishkah Valley School District No. 117Lake District HospitalWoodland School District No. 404Lake Grove Water DistrictYakima School District No. 7Lakeside Fire District No. 4Yelm Community School District No. 2Lane County Fire District No. 1Zillah School District No. 205Lane Library DistrictSpecial DistrictLane Transit DistrictAcme Water District No. 18Langlois Water DistrictAdams County Fire Protection District No. 1LaPine Special Sewer DistrictAdams County Mosquito Control DistrictLebanon Aquatic DistrictAeneas Lake Irrigation DistrictLebanon Fire DistrictAlderwood Water and Wastewater DistrictLewis and Clark Rural Fire Protection DistrictAlpine Water DistrictLibby Drainage DistrictAnacortes Housing AuthorityLinn Benton Housing AuthorityAnnapolis Water DistrictLookingglass Rural Fire DistrictAsotin County Cemetery District No. 1Lorane Rural Fire Protection DistrictAsotin County Conservation DistrictLowell Rural Fire Protection DistrictAsotin County Fire District No. 1Lower Umpqua Hospital DistrictAsotin County Housing AuthorityLusted Water DistrictAsotin County Public Utility District No. 1Madras Aquatic Center DistrictBadger Mountain Irrigation DistrictMalheur County Housing AuthorityBainbridge Island Metropolitan Park and Recreation DistrictMalin Rural Fire Protection DistrictBasin City Water/Sewer DistrictMapleton Water DistrictBayview Beach Water DistrictMarion County Fire District No. 1Beacon Hill Water and Sewer DistrictMarion Soil and Water Conservation DistrictBeehive Irrigation DistrictMedford Irrigation DistrictBelfair Water District No. 1Merrill Rural Fire Protection DistrictBellevue Convention Center AuthorityMetroBellingham Housing AuthorityMcMinnville Water & LightBellingham Public Development AuthorityMid‐County Cemetery Maintenance DistrictBenton County Diking District No. 1Middle Fork Irrigation DistrictBenton County Fire Protection District No. 1Miles Crossing Sanitary Sewer DistrictBenton County Fire Protection District No. 2Mill City Rural Fire Protection DistrictBenton County Fire Protection District No. 4Milton‐Freewater Water Control DistrictBenton County Fire Protection District No. 5Mist‐Birkenfeld Rural Fire Protection DistrictBenton County Fire Protection District No. 6Mohawk Valley Rural Fire DistrictBenton County Mosquito Control DistrictMolalla River Improvement DistrictBenton County Public Utility District No. 1Molalla Rural Fire Protection District No. 73Benton Irrigation DistrictMonroe Rural Fire Protection DistrictBenton‐Franklin Health DistrictMorrow County Health DistrictBeverly Water DistrictMountain View Hospital DistrictBirch Bay Water and Sewer DistrictMt. Angel Fire DistrictBlack Diamond Water DistrictMultnomah County Drainage District No. 1Bremerton Housing AuthorityMultnomah County Rural Fire Protection District No. 10Buckhannon‐Upshur County Airport AuthorityMultnomah County Rural Fire Protection District No. 14Burbank Irrigation District No. 4Nesika Beach‐Ophir Water DistrictCarnhope Irrigation District No 7Neskowin Regional Sanitary AuthorityCascadia Conservation DistrictNeskowin Regional Water DistrictCedar River Water and Sewer DistrictNestucca Rural Fire Protection DistrictCentral Klickitat County Park and Recreation DistrictNetarts Oceanside Sanitary DistrictCentral Pierce Fire and Rescue District No. 6Netarts‐Oceanside Rural Fire Protection DistrictCentral Puget Sound Regional Transit AuthorityNorth Bay Rural Protection Fire DistrictCentral Valley Ambulance AuthorityNorth Bend City/Coos‐Curry Housing AuthorityChelan County Fire District No. 1North Central Public Health DistrictChelan County Fire District No. 3North Clackamas Parks and Recreation DistrictChelan County Fire District No. 5North County Recreation DistrictChelan County Fire District No. 6North Gilliam Cemetery DistrictChelan County Fire District No. 7North Gilliam County Rural Fire Protection DistrictChelan County Fire District No. 8North Lincoln Fire and Rescue District No. 1Chelan County Fire District No. 9North Powder Rural Fire Protection DistrictChelan County Public Hospital District No. 1North Sherman County Rural Fire Protection DistrictChelan County Public Utility District No. 1North Unit Irrigation DistrictChelan County/Wenatchee Housing AuthorityNortheast Oregon Housing AuthorityChelan‐Douglas Health DistrictNorthern Wasco County Park and Recreation DistrictChinook Water DistrictNorthern Wasco County People's Utility DistrictChuckanut Community Forest Park DistrictNorthwest Oregon Housing AuthorityClallam Conservation DistrictNyssa Road Assessment District No. 2Clallam County Fire District No. 2Nyssa Rural Fire Protection DistrictClallam County Fire District No. 5Oak Hill Sanitary DistrictClallam County Fire District No. 6Oak Lodge Sanitary DistrictClallam County Fire Protection District No. 1Oak Lodge Water DistrictClallam County Fire Protection District No. 3Oceanside Water DistrictClallam County Fire Protection District No. 4Ochoco West Sanitary DistrictClallam County Hospital District No. 1Odell Sanitary DistrictClallam County Housing AuthorityOntario Library DistrictClallam County Parks and Recreation District No. 1Oregon Fire Districts AssociationClallam County Public Hospital District No. 2Oregon Infrastructure Finance AuthorityClallam County Public Utility District No. 1Oregon Trail Library DistrictClark County Fire District No. 10Oregon Water Wonderland Unit II Sanitary DistrictClark County Fire District No. 11Owyhee Irrigation DistrictClark County Fire District No. 13Appendix BPage 8 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonPacific City Joint Water Sanitary AuthorityClark County Fire District No. 5Pacific Communities Health DistrictClark County Fire Protection District No. 3Palatine Hill Water DistrictClark County Fire Protection District No. 6Peninsula Drainage District No. 1Clark County Public Utility District No. 1Peninsula Drainage District No. 2Clark Regional Wastewater DistrictPilot Rock Fire Protection DistrictCline Irrigation DistrictPine Grove Rural Fire Protection DistrictClinton Water DistrictPleasant Hill Rural Fire Protection DistrictCoal Creek Utility DistrictPleasant Home Water DistrictColumbia Conservation DistrictPolk County Fire District No‐ 1Columbia County Fire District No. 3Polk County Housing AuthorityColumbia County Public Hospital District No. 1Polk Soil and Water Conservation DistrictColumbia County Rural Library DistrictPortland Metropolitan Area Water DistrictColumbia Irrigation DistrictPublic Procurement AuthorityColumbia Valley Water DistrictRainbow Water DistrictColville Indian Housing AuthorityRaleigh Water DistrictConsolidated Irrigation District No. 14Redmond Area Park and Recreation DistrictCovington Water DistrictRiddle Rural Fire DistrictCowiche Sewer DistrictRiver Forest Acres Special Road DistrictCowlitz County Cemetery District No. 2River Road Park and Recreation DistrictCowlitz County Fire District No. 6Rivergrove Water DistrictCowlitz County Public Utility District No. 1Roads End Sanitary DistrictCowlitz Transit AuthorityRoberts Creek Water DistrictCross Valley Water DistrictRockwood Water People's Utility DistrictDallesport Water DistrictRogue River Cemetery Maintenance DistrictDouglas County Fire District No. 2Rogue Valley Transportation DistrictDouglas County Fire Protection District No. 5Roseburg Urban Sanitary AuthorityDouglas County Public Utility District No. 1Sable Drive Road DistrictDouglas County Sewer District No. 1Salem Area Mass Transit DistrictDouglas‐Okanogan County Fire District No. 15Salem Housing AuthorityEast Columbia Basin Irrigation DistrictSalem‐Keizer Transit DistrictEast Gig Harbor Water DistrictSanta Clara Rural Fire Protection DistrictEast Lewis County Public Development AuthoritySantiam Water Control DistrictEast Pierce Fire and Rescue District No. 22Scappoose Rural Fire DistrictEast Spokane Water District No. 1Scio Rural Fire DistrictEast Wenatchee Water DistrictScottsburg Rural Fire DistrictEastmont Metropolitan Park DistrictSeal Rock Fire DistrictEastsound Sewer and Water DistrictSeal Rock Water DistrictEdmonds Public Facilities DistrictShangri‐La Water DistrictEllensburg Business Development AuthorityShasta View Irrigation DistrictEnterprise Cemetery District No. 7Siletz Rural Fire Protection DistrictEntiat Irrigation DistrictSilverton Fire DistrictEverett Housing AuthoritySisters‐Camp Sherman Rural Fire Protection DistrictEverett Public Facilities DistrictSiuslaw Public Library DistrictEvergreen Water‐Sewer District No. 19South Clackamas Transportation DistrictFall City Water DistrictSouth Suburban Sanitary DistrictFerry County Public Utility District No. 1Southern Curry Cemetery Maintenance DistrictFerry/Okanogan County Fire Protection District No. 13Southwest Lincoln County Water DistrictFisherman Bay Sewer DistrictSpring River Special Road DistrictFoster Creek Conservation DistrictSpringfield Utility DistrictFour Lakes Water District No. 10Stanfield Fire District No. 7‐402Franklin Conservation DistrictStayton Fire DistrictFranklin County Cemetery District No. 2Suburban East Salem Water DistrictFranklin County Fire District No. 1Sunrise Water AuthorityFranklin County Fire Protection District No. 3Sunset Empire Transportation DistrictFranklin County Irrigation District No. 1Swalley Irrigation DistrictFranklin County Public Utility District No. 1Sweet Home Fire and Ambulance DistrictFreeland Water and Sewer DistrictTalent Irrigation DistrictFt. Worden Public Development AuthorityTerrebonne Domestic Water DistrictGardena Farms Irrigation District No. 13Three Sisters Irrigation DistrictGoforth Special Utility DistrictTillamook County Transportation DistrictGrand Coulee Project Hydroelectric AuthorityTillamook People's Utility DistrictGrandview Irrigation DistrictTiller Rural Fire DistrictGrant County Airport District No. 1Toledo Rural Fire Protection DistrictGrant County Fire District No. 10Tri City Rural Fire District No. 4Grant County Fire District No. 11Tri City Water DistrictGrant County Fire District No. 3Tri‐City Service DistrictGrant County Fire District No. 4Tri‐County Metropolitan Transportation DistrictGrant County Fire District No. 7Tualatan Hills Park and Recreation DistrictGrant County Fire Protection District No. 5Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation DistrictGrant County Housing AuthorityTualatin Valley Irrigation DistrictGrant County Mosquito Control District No. 1Tualatin Valley Water DistrictGrant County Mosquito District No. 2Tumalo Irrigation DistrictGrant County Port District No. 4Twin Rocks Sanitary DistrictGrant County Port District No. 6Umatilla County Housing AuthorityGrant County Port District No. 7Umatilla Hospital DistrictGrant County Public Hospital District No. 1Umatilla Land Redevelopment AuthorityGrant County Public Hospital District No. 2Umatilla Morrow Radio and Data DistrictGrant County Public Hospital District No. 3Umatilla Reservation Housing AuthorityGrant County Public Hospital District No. 4Umatilla Rural Fire Protection DistrictGrant County Public Utility District No. 2Union Cemetery DistrictGrant Transit AuthorityVale Oregon Irrigation DistrictGrays Harbor Conservation DistrictValley View Water DistrictGrays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 1Vandevert Acres Special Road DistrictGrays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 12Vineyard Mountain Water and Improvement DistrictGrays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 14Walla Walla River Irrigation DistrictGrays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 2Wallowa County Health Care DistrictGrays Harbor County Fire Protection District No. 7Wamic Water and Sanitary AuthorityGrays Harbor County Housing AuthorityWarm Springs Housing AuthorityGrays Harbor County Water District No. 1Wasco County Soil and Water Conservation DistrictGrays Harbor County Water District No. 2Washington County Fire District No. 2Grays Harbor Drainage District No. 1Washington County Housing AuthorityGrays Harbor Fire District No. 10Water Wonderland Improvement DistrictGrays Harbor Historical Seaport AuthorityWedderburn Sanitary DistrictGrays Harbor Public Utility District No. 1Appendix BPage 9 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonWest Slope Water DistrictGrays Harbor Transportation AuthorityWest Valley Housing AuthorityGreater Wenatchee Irrigation DistrictWestern Lane Ambulance DistrictGreater Wenatchee Regional Events Center Public Facilities DistrictWestport Wauna Rural Fire Protection DistrictGreen Tank Irrigation District No. 11Westwood Hills Road DistrictHartstene Pointe Water‐Sewer DistrictWiard Memorial Park DistrictHighland Water DistrictWickiup Water DistrictHighlands Sewer DistrictWillamalane Park and Recreation DistrictHighline Water DistrictWilliams Rural Fire Protection DistrictHistoric Seattle Preservation and Development AuthorityWillow Creek Park DistrictHolmes Harbor Sewer DistrictWinchester Bay Sanitary DistrictHunters Water DistrictWinston‐Dillard Fire DistrictHydro Irrigation District No. 9Winston‐Dillard Water DistrictIcicle Irrigation DistrictWoodburn Rural Fire Protection DistrictInchelium Water DistrictYamhill County Housing AuthorityIrvin Water District No. 6Yamhill Fire Protection DistrictIsland County Fire District No. 3Youngs River‐Lewis and Clark Water DistrictIsland County Fire Protection District No. 1StateIsland County Housing AuthorityOregon Department of Administrative ServicesJefferson County Conservation DistrictOregon Department of RevenueJefferson County Fire District No. 5Oregon Health Licensing AgencyJefferson County Fire Protection District No. 1Oregon Higher Education Coordinating CommissionJefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3Oregon Secretary of StateJefferson County Public Utility District No. 1Oregon State Board of NursingJefferson County Water District No. 3State of OregonJefferson Transit AuthorityTribalJuniper Beach Water DistrictBurns Paiute TribeKapowsin Water DistrictConfederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw IndiansKelso Housing AuthorityConfederated Tribes of Grand Ronde CommunityKennewick Housing AuthorityConfederated Tribes of Siletz IndiansKennewick Irrigation DistrictConfederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian ReservationKennewick Public Facilities DistrictConfederated Tribes of the Warm SpringsKennewick Public Hospital DistrictCoquille Indian TribeKent Fire Department Regional Fire AuthorityKlamath TribesKey Peninsula Metro Parks DistrictKing County Airport District No. 1King County Ferry DistrictKing County Fire Protection District No. 16King County Fire Protection District No. 2King County Fire Protection District No. 20King County Fire Protection District No. 25King County Fire Protection District No. 27King County Fire Protection District No. 28King County Fire Protection District No. 34King County Fire Protection District No. 37King County Fire Protection District No. 40King County Fire Protection District No. 43King County Fire Protection District No. 44King County Fire Protection District No. 45King County Fire Protection District No. 47King County Fire Protection District No. 50King County Flood Control DistrictKing County Hospital District No. 4King County Housing AuthorityKing County Public Hospital District No. 1King County Public Hospital District No. 2King County Water District No. 1King County Water District No. 111King County Water District No. 117King County Water District No. 119King County Water District No. 125King County Water District No. 19King County Water District No. 20King County Water District No. 45King County Water District No. 49King County Water District No. 54King County Water District No. 90Kitsap Conservation DistrictKitsap County Consolidated Housing AuthorityKitsap County Fire District No. 18Kitsap County Public Utility District No. 1Kitsap County Rural Library DistrictKitsap Public Health DistrictKittitas County Conservation DistrictKittitas County Fire District No. 2Kittitas County Fire Protection District No. 7Kittitas County Hospital District No. 2Kittitas County Housing AuthorityKittitas County Public Utility District No. 1Kittitas County Water District No. 5Kittitas County Water District No. 6Kittitas County Water District No. 7Klickitat County Fire District No. 14Klickitat County Fire District No. 15Klickitat County Fire District No.1Klickitat County Fire Protection District No. 4Klickitat County Fire Protection District No. 5Klickitat County Port District No. 1Klickitat County Public Hospital District No. 1Klickitat County Public Hospital District No. 2Klickitat County Public Utility District No. 1Lacey Fire District 3Lake Chelan Reclamation DistrictLake Chelan Sewer DistrictLake Forest Park Water DistrictAppendix BPage 10 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonLake Stevens Sewer DistrictLake Wenatchee Water DistrictLake Whatcom Water and Sewer DistrictLakehaven Utility DistrictLakewood Water DistrictLenora Water and Sewer DistrictLewis County Conservation DistrictLewis County Fire District No. 1Lewis County Fire District No. 11Lewis County Fire District No. 13Lewis County Fire District No. 18Lewis County Fire District No. 9Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 14Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 16Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 2Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 5Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 6Lewis County Fire Protection District No. 8Lewis County Hospital District No. 1Lewis County Public Facilities DistrictLewis County Public Utility District No. 1Lewis County Water District No. 1Lewis County Water District No. 3Lewis Public Transportation Benefit Area AuthorityLiberty Lake Sewer and Water DistrictLincoln County Fire District No. 1Lincoln County Fire District No. 4Lincoln County Fire Protection District No. 5Lincoln County Fire Protection District No. 6Lincoln County Fire Protection District No. 8Lincoln County Hospital District No. 3Lincoln‐Adams County Fire Protection District No. 3Longview Housing AuthorityLopez Island Library DistrictLower Elwha Housing AuthorityLower Squilchuck Irrigation DistrictLummi Housing AuthorityLummi Tribal Sewer and Water DistrictMakah Housing AuthorityMalaga Water DistrictManchester Water DistrictManson Park and Recreation DistrictMarshland Flood Control DistrictMarysville Fire DistrictMason Conservation DistrictMason County Fire District No. 13Mason County Fire District No. 17Mason County Fire District No. 2Mason County Fire District No. 4Mason County Fire Protection District No. 5Mason County Fire Protection District No. 8Mason County Housing AuthorityMason County Public Hospital District No. 1Mason County Public Utility District No. 1Mason County Public Utility District No. 3Mason County Transit AuthorityMethow Valley Irrigation DistrictMid‐Columbia Library DistrictMidway Sewer DistrictMoab Irrigation District No. 20Moses Lake Irrigation and Rehabilitation DistrictMukilteo Water and Wastewater DistrictNaches‐Selah Irrigation DistrictNorth Beach Water DistrictNorth Central Washington Economic Development DistrictNorth City Water DistrictNorth County Regional Fire AuthorityNorth Highline Fire DistrictNorth Perry Avenue Water DistrictNorth Whidbey Park and Recreation DistrictNortheast Sammamish Sewer and Water DistrictNorthshore Utility DistrictNorthwest Park and Recreation District No. 2Okanogan Conservation DistrictOkanogan County Cemetery District No. 4Okanogan County Fire District No. 6Okanogan County Fire Protection District No. 11Okanogan County Housing AuthorityOkanogan County Public Hospital District No. 3Okanogan County Public Hospital District No. 4Okanogan County Public Utility District No. 1Okanogan Fire Protection District No. 16Okanogan Irrigation DistrictOlympic View Water and Sewer DistrictOlympus Terrace Sewer DistrictOrcas Island Library DistrictOrchard Avenue Irrigation District No. 6Oroville Housing AuthorityOroville‐Tonasket Irrigation DistrictOthello Housing AuthorityPacific Conservation DistrictPacific County Fire District No. 2Pacific County Fire Protection District No. 1Pacific County Fire Protection District No. 3Appendix BPage 11 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonPacific County Public Healthcare Services District No. 3Pacific County Public Utility District No. 2Pacific Hospital Preservation and Development AuthorityPalouse Conservation DistrictPasco/Franklin County Housing AuthorityPend Oreille County Fire District No. 2Pend Oreille County Fire District No. 4Pend Oreille County Fire District No. 5Pend Oreille County Library DistrictPend Oreille County Public Hospital District No. 1Pend Oreille County Public Utility District No. 1Peninsula Housing AuthorityPeninsula Metropolitan Park DistrictPeshastin Irrigation DistrictPeshastin Water DistrictPierce Conservation DistrictPierce County Fire District No. 13Pierce County Fire District No. 16Pierce County Fire District No. 18Pierce County Fire District No. 23Pierce County Fire District No. 27Pierce County Fire District No. 3Pierce County Fire District No. 5Pierce County Fire District No. 8Pierce County Fire Protection District No. 14Pierce County Fire Protection District No. 2Pierce County Fire Protection District No. 21Pierce County Housing AuthorityPike Place Market Preservation and Development AuthorityPoint Roberts Water District No. 4Ponderay Shores Water and Sewer DistrictPort Ludlow Drainage DistrictPrescott Joint Parks and Recreation DistrictProsser Fire District No. 3Prosser Public Hospital DistrictPublic Hospital District No. 1Public Hospital District No. 3Public Utility District No‐ 1Puyallup Tribal Health AuthorityQuileute Housing AuthorityQuinault Housing AuthorityQuincy‐Columbia Basin Irrigation DistrictRenton Housing AuthorityRichland Housing AuthorityRichland Public Facilities DistrictRonald Wastewater DistrictRoza Irrigation DistrictSacheen Lake Sewer and Water DistrictSammamish Plateau Water and Sewer DistrictSan Juan Island Library DistrictSaratoga Water DistrictScatchet Head Water DistrictSeattle Chinatown International District Preservation and Development AuthoritySeattle Housing AuthoritySeattle Southside Regional Tourism AuthoritySelah‐Moxee Irrigation DistrictSi View Metropolitan Park DistrictSilver Lake Flood Control DistrictSilver Lake Water And Sewer DistrictSilverdale Water DistrictSkagit Conservation DistrictSkagit County Cemetery District No. 2Skagit County Fire District No. 10Skagit County Fire District No. 11Skagit County Fire District No. 15Skagit County Fire District No. 9Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 13Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 14Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 2Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 3Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 4Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 5Skagit County Fire Protection District No. 8Skagit County Housing AuthoritySkagit County Public Hospital District No. 1Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 2Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 304Skagit County Public Utility District No. 1Skagit County Sewer District No. 1Skagit County Sewer District No. 2Skagit Valley Public Hospital District No. 1Skamania County Fire District No. 1Skamania County Fire District No. 4Skamania County Public Hospital District No. 1Skamania County Public Utility District No. 1Skamokawa Water and Sewer DistrictSkyway Water and Sewer DistrictSnohomish County Fire District No. 15Snohomish County Fire District No. 16Snohomish County Fire District No. 19Snohomish County Fire District No. 26Snohomish County Fire District No. 5Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 1Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 17Appendix BPage 12 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonSnohomish County Fire Protection District No. 21Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 22Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 25Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 28Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 3Snohomish County Fire Protection District No. 7Snohomish County Housing AuthoritySnohomish County Public Hospital District No. 1Snohomish County Public Hospital District No. 2Snohomish County Public Utility District No. 1Snohomish Health DistrictSnohomish River Regional Water AuthoritySnoqualmie Valley Hospital DistrictSouth Columbia Basin Irrigation DistrictSouth Correctional Entity Public Development AuthoritySouth Naches Irrigation DistrictSouth Whatcom Fire AuthoritySouth Whidbey Parks and Recreation DistrictSouth Yakima Conservation DistrictSouthwest Suburban Sewer DistrictSpokane Conservation DistrictSpokane County Fire District No. 12Spokane County Fire District No. 2Spokane County Fire District No. 4Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 10Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 11Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 13Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 3Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 5Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 8Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 9Spokane County Library DistrictSpokane County Water District No. 3Spokane Housing AuthoritySpokane Indian Housing AuthoritySpokane Public Facilities DistrictSpokane Regional Health DistrictSpokane Transit AuthorityStartup Water DistrictSteptoe Sewer District No. 1Stevens County Fire District No. 2Stevens County Fire District No. 6Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 1Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 10Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 12Stevens County Fire Protection District No. 5Stevens County Public Utility District No. 1Stevens County Rural Library DistrictStevens Pass Sewer DistrictSun Harbor Water District No. 3Sunnyside Housing AuthoritySunnyside Valley Irrigation DistrictSunnyslope Water DistrictSwinomish Housing AuthorityTacoma Community Redevelopment AuthorityTacoma Housing AuthorityTacoma Metropolitan Park DistrictTerrace Heights Sewer DistrictThea Foss Waterway Development AuthorityThree Rivers Regional Wastewater AuthorityThurston Conservation DistrictThurston County Fire District No. 12Thurston County Fire District No. 4Thurston County Fire District No. 9Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 3Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 5Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 6Thurston County Fire Protection District No. 8Thurston County Housing AuthorityThurston County Public Utility District No. 1Tri‐County Economic Development DistrictTukwila Metropolitan Park DistrictUnderwood Conservation DistrictUnion Gap Irrigation DistrictVal Vue Sewer DistrictValley Regional Fire AuthorityValley View Sewer DistrictValley Water DistrictVancouver Housing AuthorityVashon Park DistrictWahkiakum County Public Utility District No. 1Wahkiakum Fire Protection District No. 1Wahkiakum Port District No. 1Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 1Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 3Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 4Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 5Walla Walla County Fire Protection District No. 8Walla Walla County Rural Library DistrictWalla Walla Housing AuthorityWallula Water District No. 1Washington State Convention Center Public Facilities DistrictWashington State Major League Baseball Stadium Public Facilities DistrictWashington State Tobacco Settlement AuthorityAppendix BPage 13 of 14 Hawaii Idaho Oregon South Carolina Utah WashingtonWater District 19Wells Ranch Irrigation DistrictWenatchee Reclamation DistrictWenatchee‐Chiwawa Irrigation DistrictWest Sound Utility DistrictWhatcom Conservation DistrictWhatcom County Fire District No. 1Whatcom County Fire District No. 11Whatcom County Fire District No. 14Whatcom County Fire District No. 16Whatcom County Fire District No. 17Whatcom County Fire District No. 4Whatcom County Fire District No. 5Whatcom County Fire District No. 7Whatcom County Fire District No. 8Whatcom County Public Utility District No. 1Whatcom County Water District No. 12Whatcom County Water District No. 13Whatcom County Water District No. 2Whatcom County Water District No. 7Whatcom Transportation AuthorityWhidbey Island Public Hospital DistrictWhitestone Reclamation DistrictWhitman County Fire District No. 11Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 12Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 14Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 7Whitman County Public Hospital District No. 3Whitman County Rural Library DistrictWhitworth Water District No. 2Willapa Valley Water DistrictWilliam Shore Memorial Pool DistrictWilliams Lake Sewer District No. 2Wine Science Center Development AuthorityWollochet Harbor Sewer DistrictWoodinville Water DistrictYakima County Fire District No. 1Yakima County Fire District No. 3Yakima County Fire District No. 4Yakima County Fire District No. 5Yakima County Fire District No. 6Yakima County Fire Protection District No. 12Yakima County Fire Protection District No. 14Yakima County Mosquito Control DistrictYakima Housing AuthorityYakima Regional Clean Air AuthorityYakima Rural County Library DistrictYakima‐Tieton Irrigation DistrictStateNorth Seattle Community CollegeSeattle CollegesState Of WashingtonWashington State Department of Enterprise ServicesWashington State Department of HealthWashington State Department of Social and Health ServicesWashington State Health Care AuthorityTribalColumbia River Inter‐Tribal Fish CommissionConfederated Tribes of the Chehalis ReservationConfederated Tribes of the Colville ReservationConfederated Tribes of the Yakama NationCowlitz Indian TribeHoh Indian TribeJamestown S'Klallam TribeKalispel Tribe of IndiansLower Elwha Klallam TribeLummi Indian NationMakah TribeMuckleshoot Indian TribeNisqually Indian TribeNooksack Indian TribePort Gamble S'Klallam TribePuyallup Tribe of IndiansQuileute Indian TribeQuinault Indian NationSamish Indian NationSauk‐Suiattle Indian TribeSkokomish Indian TribeSnoqualmie Indian TribeSpokane TribeSquaxin Island TribeStillaguamish Tribe of IndiansSuquamish TribeSwinomish Indian Tribal CommunityTulalip TribesUpper Skagit Indian TribeYakama Nation Land EnterpriseAppendix BPage 14 of 14 Appendix C - Political Subdivision List for Virginia City/Town Special Distrricts Public K-12 County Public Higher Education State Townships City of Alexandria Accomack-Northampton Transportation District Accomack County Public Schools Accomack County Blue Ridge Community College State of Virginia Township of Green, Ross County City of Bristol Albemarle County Service Authority Albemarle County Public Schools Albemarle County Central Virginia Community College Virginia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services City of Buena Vista Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail Authority Alexandria City Public Schools Alleghany County Christopher Newport University Virginia Department of General Services City of Charlottesville Alexandria Redevelopment and Housing Authority Alleghany County Public Schools Amelia County College of William and Mary Virginia Department of Health City of Chesapeake Appomattox River Water Authority Amelia County Public Schools Amherst County Dabney S. Lancaster Community College Virginia Department of Health Professions City of Colonial Heights Bath County Airport Authority Amherst County Public Schools Appomattox County Danville Community College Virginia Department of Public Works City of Covington Bedford County Economic Development Authority Appomattox County Public Schools Arlington County Eastern Shore Community College City of Danville Bedford Regional Water Authority Arlington Public Schools Augusta County Eastern Virginia Medical School City of Emporia Big Stone Gap Redevelopment and Housing Authority Atlantic Shores Christian Schools Bath County George Mason University City of Fairfax Blacksburg-Christiansburg-VPI Water Authority Augusta County Public Schools Bedford County Germanna Community College City of Falls Church Blacksburg-Virginia Polytechnic Institute Sanitation Authority Bath County Public Schools Bedford County Public Service Authority J. Sargeant Reynolds Community College City of Franklin Blue Ridge Airport Authority Bedford County Public Schools Bland County James Madison University City of Fredericksburg Blue Ridge Crossroads Economic Development Authority Bland County Public Schools Botetourt County John Tyler Community College City of Galax Blue Ridge Regional Jail Authority Botetourt County Public Schools Brunswick County Longwood University City of Hampton Blue Ridge Soil and Water Conservation District Bristol Virginia Public Schools Buchanan County Lord Fairfax Community College City of Harrisonburg Bristol Redevelopment and Housing Authority Brunswick County Public Schools Buchanan County Public Service Authority Massanutten Technical Center City of Hopewell Brookneal-Campbell County Airport Authority Buchanan County Schools Buckingham County Mountain Empire Community College City of Lexington Brunswick County Industrial Development Authority Buckingham County Public Schools Buckingham County Board of Supervisors New College Institute City of Lynchburg Buchanan County Industrial Development Authority Buena Vista City Public Schools Campbell County New River Community College City of Manassas Buena Vista Public Service Authority Campbell County Public Schools Caroline County Norfolk State University City of Manassas Park Campbell County Utilities and Service Authority Caroline County Public Schools Carroll County Northern Virginia Community College City of Martinsville Carroll County Industrial Development Authority Carroll County Public Schools Carroll County Public Service Authority Old Dominion University City of Newport News Carroll-Grayson-Galax Solid Waste Authority Charles City County School District Charles City County Patrick Henry Community College City of Norfolk Castlewood Water and Sewage Authority Charlotte County Public Schools Charlotte County Paul D. Camp Community College City of Norton Central Shenandoah Planning District Commission Charlottesville City Schools Chesterfield County Piedmont Virginia Community College City of Petersburg Central Virginia Regional Jail Authority Chesapeake Public Schools Clarke County Radford University City of Poquoson Central Virginia Waste Management Authority Chesterfield County Public Schools Craig County Rappahannock Community College City of Portsmouth Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority Clarke County School District Culpeper County Richard Bland College City of Radford Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Authority Colonial Beach Schools Cumberland County Rowanty Technical Center City of Richmond Chesapeake Airport Authority Colonial Heights Public Schools Dickenson County Southern Virginia Higher Education Center City of Roanoke Chesapeake Bay Bridge and Tunnel District Copper River School District Dinwiddie County Southside Virginia Community College City of Salem Chesapeake Hospital Authority Covington City Public Schools Essex County Southwest Virginia Community College City of Staunton Chesapeake Redevelopment and Housing Authority Craig County Public Schools Fairfax County State Council of Higher Education for Virginia City of Suffolk Coeburn-Norton-Wise Regional Wastewater Authority Culpeper County Public Schools Fauquier County Thomas Nelson Community College City of Virginia Beach Craig-New Castle Solid Waste Authority Cumberland County Public Schools Floyd County Tidewater Community College City of Waynesboro Crater District Area Agency on Aging/Foster Grandparent Program, Inc.Danville Public Schools Fluvanna County University of Mary Washington City of Williamsburg Culpeper Soil and Water Conservation District Dickenson County Public Schools Franklin County University of Virginia City of Winchester Cumberland Plateau Planning District Commission Dinwiddie County Public Schools Frederick County University of Virginia Foundation Town of Abingdon Cumberland Plateau Regional Housing Authority Fairfax County Public Schools Giles County University of Virginia Health System Town of Alberta Cumberland Plateau Regional Waste Management Authority Falls Church City Public Schools Gloucester County University of Virginia, Wise Town of Altavista Danville Redevelopment and Housing Authority Fauquier County Public Schools Goochland County Virginia College Savings Plan Town of Amherst Danville-Pittsylvania County Regional Industrial Facilities Authority Floyd County Public Schools Grayson County Virginia Commonwealth University Town of Appalachia Dickenson County Industrial Development Authority Fluvanna County Public Schools Greene County Virginia Community College System Town of Appomattox Dickenson County Public Service Authority Franklin City Schools Greensville County Virginia Highlands Community College Town of Ashland Dinwiddie Airport and Industrial Authority Franklin County Public Schools Halifax County Virginia Military Institute Town of Bedford Dinwiddie County Water Authority Frederick County Public Schools Hanover County Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Town of Berryville District Three Governmental Cooperative Fredericksburg City Public Schools Henrico County Virginia State University Town of Big Stone Gap Dryden Water Authority Galax City Public Schools Henry County Virginia Western Community College Town of Blacksburg Eastern Shore of Virginia Broadband Authority Giles County Public Schools Henry County Public Service Authority Wytheville Community College Town of Bluefield Essex County Industrial Development Authority Gloucester County Public Schools Highland County Town of Boones Mill Fairfax County Economic Development Authority Goochland County Public Schools Isle of Wight County Town of Bowling Green Fairfax County Park Authority Grayson County Public Schools James City County Town of Boyce Fairfax County Redevelopment and Housing Authority Greene County Schools King and Queen County Town of Boydton Fairfax County Water Authority Greensville County Public Schools King George County Town of Bridgewater Fauquier County Water and Sanitation Authority Halifax County Public Schools King George County Service Authority Town of Broadway Floyd County Economic Development Authority Hampton City Schools King William County Town of Brodnax Floyd-Floyd County Public Service Authority Hanover County Public Schools Lancaster County Town of Brookneal Franklin Redevelopment and Housing Authority Harrisonburg City Public Schools Lee County Town of Buchanan Frederick County Sanitation Authority Henrico County Public Schools Loudoun County Town of Burkeville Fredericksburg Stafford Park Authority Henry County Public Schools Louisa County Town of Cape Charles Frederick-Winchester Service Authority Highland County Public Schools Lunenburg County Town of Cedar Bluff Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority Hopewell Public Schools Madison County Town of Charlotte Court House Ft. Monroe Authority Imagine Schools Mathews County Town of Chase City Giles County Public Service Authority Isle of Wight County Schools Mecklenburg County Town of Chatham Greensville County Water and Sewer Authority King and Queen County Public Schools Middlesex County Town of Cheriton Halifax County Industrial Development Authority King George County Public Schools Montgomery County Town of Chilhowie Halifax County Service Authority King William County Public Schools Nelson County Town of Chincoteague Hampton Redevelopment and Housing Authority Lancaster County Public School System New Kent County Town of Christiansburg Hampton Roads Planning District Commission Lee County Public Schools Northampton County Town of Claremont Hampton Roads Regional Jail Authority Lexington City Schools Northumberland County Town of Clarksville Hampton Roads Sanitation District Loudoun County Public Schools Nottoway County Town of Clifton Harrisonburg Redevelopment and Housing Authority Louisa County Public Schools Orange County Town of Clifton Forge Harrisonburg-Rockingham Regional Sewer Authority Lynchburg City Schools Page County Town of Clinchco Headwaters Soil and Water Conservation District Madison County Public Schools Patrick County Town of Clintwood Hopewell Redevelopment and Housing Authority Manassas City Public Schools Pittsylvania County Town of Coeburn James River Water Authority Manassas Park City Schools Pittsylvania County Service Authority Town of Colonial Beach John Flannagan Water Authority Martinsville Public Schools Powhatan County Town of Columbia Joint Public Service Authority Mathews County School District Prince Edward County Town of Courtland Lee County Industrial Development Authority Mecklenburg County Public Schools Prince George County Town of Craigsville Lee County Public Service Authority Middlesex County Public Schools Prince William County Town of Crewe LENOWISCO Planning District Commission Montgomery County Public Schools Prince William County Service Authority Town of Culpeper Lord Fairfax Soil and Water Conservation District Nelson County Public Schools Pulaski County Town of Damascus Loudoun County Sanitation Authority New Kent County Schools Rappahannock County Town of Dayton Louisa County Water Authority Newport News Public Schools Richmond County Town of Dendron Lynchburg Redevelopment and Housing Authority Norfolk Public Schools Roanoke County Town of Dillwyn Marion Redevelopment and Housing Authority Northampton County School District Rockbridge County Town of Drakes Branch Maury Service Authority Northumberland County Public Schools Rockbridge County Public Service Authority Town of Dublin Mecklenburg-Brunswick Regional Airport Authority Norton City Public Schools Rockingham County Town of Dumfries Meherrin River Regional Jail Authority Nottoway County Public Schools Russell County Town of Dungannon Middle Peninsula Regional Airport Authority Orange County Public Schools Scott County Appendix C Page 1 of 2 City/Town Special Distrricts Public K-12 County Public Higher Education State Townships Town of Elkton Montgomery County Public Service Authority Page County Public Schools Scott County Public Service Authority Town of Exmore Montgomery Regional Solid Waste Authority Patrick County Public Schools Shenandoah County Town of Farmville Mt. Rogers Planning District Commission Petersburg City Public Schools Smyth County Town of Fincastle New River Regional Water Authority Pittsylvania County School District Southampton County Town of Floyd New River Resource Authority Poquoson City Public Schools Spotsylvania County Town of Fries New River Valley Planning District Commission Portsmouth Public Schools Stafford County Town of Front Royal New River Valley Regional Jail Authority Powhatan County Public Schools Surry County Town of Gate City Newport News Redevelopment and Housing Authority Prince Edward County Schools Sussex County Town of Glade Spring Nicholas County Solid Waste Authority Prince George County Public Schools Tazewell County Town of Glasgow Norfolk Airport Authority Prince William County Schools Tri-County Lake Administrative Commission Town of Glen Lyn Norfolk Economic Development Authority Pulaski County Public Schools Warren County Town of Gordonsville Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority Radford City Schools Washington County Town of Goshen Northern Neck Planning District Commission Rappahannock County Public Schools Westmoreland County Town of Gretna Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority Richmond City Public Schools Wise County Town of Grottoes Northern Virginia Transportation Authority Richmond County Public Schools Wythe County Town of Halifax Northwestern Regional Jail Authority Roanoke City Public Schools York County Town of Hamilton NRV Regional Water Authority Roanoke County Public Schools Town of Haymarket Pamunkey Regional Jail Authority Rockbridge County Schools Town of Haysi Patrick County Economic Development Authority Rockingham County Public Schools Town of Herndon Pepper's Ferry Regional Wastewater Treatment Authority Russell County Public Schools Town of Hillsville Petersburg Redevelopment and Housing Authority Salem City Schools Town of Honaker Peumansend Creek Regional Jail Authority Scott County Public Schools Town of Hurt Piedmont Soil and Water Conservation District Shenandoah County Public Schools Town of Independence Planning District One Behavioral Health Services Smyth County Public Schools Town of Iron Gate Portsmouth Redevelopment and Housing Authority Southampton County Public Schools Town of Irvington Prince William County Park Authority Spotsylvania County Public Schools Town of Jonesville Pulaski County Public Service Authority Stafford County Public Schools Town of Kenbridge Pulaski County Sewerage Authority Staunton City Schools Town of Keysville Radford Industrial Development Authority Suffolk Public Schools Town of Kilmarnock Randolph County Water, Sewer and Fire Protection Authority Surry County Public Schools Town of La Crosse Rapidan Service Authority Sussex County Public Schools Town of Lawrenceville Rappahannock Regional Jail Authority Tazewell County Public Schools Town of Leesburg Rappahannock-Shenandoah-Warren Regional Jail Authority Virginia Beach City Public Schools Town of Louisa Region 2000 Services Authority Warren County Public Schools Town of Lovettsville Richmond Behavioral Health Authority Washington County School District Town of Luray Richmond Hospital Authority Waynesboro Public Schools Town of Marion Richmond Metropolitan Authority West Point Public Schools Town of Middleburg Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority Westmoreland County Public Schools Town of Middletown Richmond Regional Planning District Commission Williamsburg-James City County Public Schools Town of Mineral Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Winchester Public Schools Town of Monterey Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority Wise County Public Schools Town of Montross Riverside Regional Jail Authority Wythe County Public Schools Town of Mt. Jackson Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority York County Public Schools Town of Narrows Roanoke River Service Authority Town of New Castle Roanoke Valley Broadband Authority Town of New Market Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Town of Nickelsville Robert E. Lee Soil and Water Conservation District Town of Occoquan Rockbridge Area Network Authority Town of Onancock Rockbridge County Solid Waste Authority Town of Orange Russell County Industrial Development Authority Town of Pamplin City Russell County Public Service Authority Town of Parksley Scott County Economic Development Authority Town of Pearisburg Scott County Redevelopment and Housing Authority Town of Pembroke Shenandoah Valley Soil and Water Conservation District Town of Pennington Gap Smyth County Industrial Development Authority Town of Phenix Smyth Washington Regional Industrial Facilities Authority Town of Pocahontas South Central Wastewater Authority Town of Pound Southeastern Public Service Authority Town of Pulaski Southside Planning District Town of Purcellville Southside Regional Jail Authority Town of Quantico Southwest Regional Recreation Authority Town of Remington Southwest Virginia Regional Jail Authority Town of Rich Creek Suffolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority Town of Richlands Tappahannock-Essex County Airport Authority Town of Ridgeway Tazewell County Airport Authority Town of Rocky Mount Tazewell County Industrial Development Authority Town of Round Hill Tazewell County Public Service Authority Town of Rural Retreat Tazwell County Public Service Authority Town of Saltville Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission Town of Scottsville Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District Town of Shenandoah Toms Brook-Maurertown Sanitary District Town of Smithfield Upper Occoquan Service Authority Town of South Boston Valley Municipal Utility District No. 2 Town of South Hill Vint Hill Economic Development Authority Town of St. Paul Virginia Beach Development Authority Town of Stanley Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority Town of Stephens City Virginia Highlands Airport Authority Town of Strasburg Virginia Housing Development Authority Town of Stuart Virginia Peninsulas Public Service Authority Town of Tangier Virginia Port Authority Town of Tappahannock Virginia Resources Authority Town of Tazewell Virginia Tech/Montgomery Regional Airport Authority Town of Timberville Virginia/Carolina Water Authority Town of Troutville Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority Town of Urbanna Washington County Industrial Development Authority Town of Victoria Washington County Service Authority Town of Vienna Waynesboro Economic Development Authority Town of Vinton Waynesboro Redevelopment and Housing Authority Town of Wakefield West Piedmont Planning District Town of Warrenton Western Virginia Water Authority Town of Warsaw Williamsburg Area Transit Authority Town of Washington Winchester Regional Airport Authority Town of Waverly Wired Road Authority Town of West Point Wise County Public Service Authority Town of White Stone Wise County Redevelopment and Housing Authority Town of Windsor Woodway Water and Sewer Authority Town of Wise Wytheville Redevelopment and Housing Authority Town of Woodstock Town of Wytheville Appendix C Page 2 of 2 (A) Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(1), Sourcewell is entitled to exercise all administrative, contractual, or other remedies permitted by law to enforce Vendor’s compliance with the terms of the request for proposal and contract award, including but not limited to those remedies set forth at 44 CFR 13.43. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (B) Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(2), Sourcewell may terminate the contract award for cause or convenience in accordance with the procedures set forth in the request for proposal and contract award and those provided by 44 CFR 13.44. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (C)Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(3)-(6)(12), and (13), Vendor shall comply with the following federal laws during the term of an award for this contract by Sourcewell: a.Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, entitled “Equal Employment Opportunity,” as amended by Executive Order 11375 of October 13, 1967, and as supplemented in Department of Labor (“DOL”) regulations (41 CFR Ch. 60); b.Copeland “Anti-Kickback” Act (18 U.S.C. 874), as supplemented in DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 3); c.Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276a-276a-7) as supplemented by DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 5); d.Section 103 and 107 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 327-330) as supplemented by DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 5); e.Section 306 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 1857(h), section 508 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1368), Executive Order 11738, and Environmental Protection Agency regulations (40 CFR part 15); and Appendix D SOURCEWELL℠ (Formerly NJPA) AWARDED VENDOR REQUIRED FEMA TERMS AND CONDITIONS CERTIFICATION Procurements by Sourcewell℠ (Formerly NJPA) or Sourcewell Members utilizing funds under a federal grant or contract funded all or in part by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may be subject to specific federal laws, regulations, and requirements in addition to those under other federal, state and local laws. This may include, but is not limited to, the procurement standards of the Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments, Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 13 (44 CFR Part 13). The terms included in this section express Vendors willingness and ability to comply with certain requirements which may be applicable to specific Sourcewell Member purchases using FEMA grant or contract dollars. Sourcewell Members may also require Proposers to enter into ancillary agreements, in addition to the Sourcewell contract’s general terms and conditions, to address a Member’s specific contractual needs, including contract requirements for a procurement using FEMA grants or contracts. Sourcewell reserves the right at any time within a contract term to require an awarded Vendor to reaffirm or resubmit proper documentation relating to these requirements. Note: The numbering and identification contained within this section is only for reference purposes and does not identify any actual Federal designation or location of the rule. Rules are located in 44 CFR Part 13. 1 f. Mandatory standards and policies relating to energy efficiency which are contained in the state energy conservation plan issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (Pub. L. 94-163, 89 Stat. 871). _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (D)Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(7), Vendor shall comply with FEMA requirements and regulations pertaining to reporting, including but not limited to those set forth at 44 CFR 40 and 41. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (E)Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(8), Vendor agrees to the following provisions regarding patents: a.During the term of an award for this contract by Sourcewell, all rights to inventions and/or discoveries that arise or are developed, in the course of or under this request for proposal and contract award, shall belong to the Sourcewell Member and be disposed of in accordance with their policy. Sourcewell and Sourcewell members, at its own discretion, may file for patents in connection with all rights to any such inventions and/or discoveries. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (F)Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(9), Vendor agrees to the following provisions, regarding copyrights: a.During the term of an award for this contract by Sourcewell, any copyrightable material or inventions, in accordance with 44 CFR 13.34, FEMA reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish or otherwise use, for Federal Government purposes: (1)The copyright in any work developed under a grant or contract; and (2) Any rights of copyright to which a grantee or a contactor purchases ownership with grant support. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (G) Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(10), Vendor shall maintain any books, documents, papers, and records of the Vendor which are directly pertinent to this request for proposal and contract award. At any time during normal business hours and as often as Sourcewell or Sourcewell Members deems necessary, Vendor shall permit Sourcewell or Sourcewell Member, FEMA, the Comptroller General of United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives to inspect and photocopy such records for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcriptions _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative (H) Pursuant to 44 CFR 13.36(i)(11), Vendor shall retain all required records for three years after FEMA or Sourcewell or Sourcewell Members makes final payments and all other pending matters are closed. In addition, Vendor shall comply with record retention requirements set forth in 44 CFR 13.42 Appendix D 2 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Agrees (YES or NO) Initials of Authorized Representative Vendor agrees to comply with federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulations and ordinances, as applicable. It is further acknowledged that Vendor certifies compliance with provisions, laws, acts, regulations, etc. as noted above. This certification shall be effective through the term of the Vendor’s Sourcewell awarded contract. Vendor: ___________________________________________________________________ Contract number: ___________________________________________________________________ Category: ___________________________________________________________________ Maturity date: ___________________________________________________________________ Address: ___________________________________________________________________ City, state, zip code: ___________________________________________________________________ Phone number: ___________________________________________________________________ Printed name and title of authorized representative: ___________________________________________________________________ Signature of authorized representative: ___________________________________________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________________________________ Appendix D 3 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00600 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-K REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:GREGORY A. BARFIELD, Director Department of Transportation BY:BELINDA McMILLAN HAENER, Administrative Manager Department of Transportation SUBJECT ***RESOLUTION - Approval and implementation of the Public Transit Agency Safety Plan as required by the Federal Transit Administration (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the Department of Transportation/FAX Public Transit Agency Safety Plan (PTASP),as required by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA),and authorize the Director of Transportation or designee to execute and file all necessary documents on behalf of the City. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The FTA has published a final rule for PTASP,as authorized by the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21).This final rule requires operators of public transportation systems that receive federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C.Chapter 53 to develop PTASPs based on the Safety Management System (SMS)approach.Operators of public transportation systems will be required to implement the safety plans.The development and implementation of safety plans will help ensure that public transportation systems are safe nationwide. BACKGROUND The public transportation industry remains among the safest surface transportation modes in terms of total reported safety events,fatalities,and injuries.Nonetheless,given public transportation service complexities,the condition of transit equipment and facilities,turnover in the transit workforce,and the quality of policies,procedures,and training,the public transportation industry remains vulnerable to catastrophic accidents. This rule outlines requirements for that would carry out explicit statutory mandates in MAP-21,which City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00600 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-K This rule outlines requirements for that would carry out explicit statutory mandates in MAP-21,which was reauthorized by the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act)and codified at 49 U.S.C.section 5329 (see attached),to strengthen the safety of public transportation systems that receive federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53. This rule requires the adoption of SMS principles and methods;the development,certification, implementation,and update of PTASPs;and the coordination of PTASP elements with other FTA programs and rules, as specified in 49 U.S.C. sections 5303, 5304, and 5329. The FAX PTASP is made up of the elements required by the FTA that includes: ·Safety Performance Targets ·Safety Management Policy ·Safety Risk Management Strategies ·Safety Assurance ·Safety Promotion The FAX PTASP was developed under guidance of the FTA in collaboration with the City’s department leadership and safety staff.The FAX PTASP meets all FTA requirements for the size of the City’s transit system. The benefits of a PTASP include: ·Improved transparency and accountability for safety management compliance ·Data-driven safety performance monitoring ·Transit system safety performance outcomes ·Maintaining eligibility for FTA funds and complying with the FAST Act. The consequences of not having a FTA-compliant PTASP include, but are not limited to: ·Loss or reduction of FTA funding ·Higher safety risk liability (determined by accidents per 100,000 miles) ·Decreased transit system operational safety ·Higher vulnerability for a catastrophic event On July 19,2018,the FTA published the PTASP Final Rule (49 C.F.R.Part 673),which requires certain operators of public transportation systems that receive federal funds under the FTA Urbanized Area Formula Grants to develop safety plans that include the processes and procedures to implement SMS. Operators of public transportation systems are required to implement the safety plans by July 20, 2020.The development and implementation of safety plans will help ensure public transportation systems are safe, nationwide. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00600 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-K This authorization to submit an approved safety plan to the FTA is not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not considered because this resolution does not include a bid or award of a construction or services contract. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to the General Fund from this request.Approval and implementation of the PTASP will help mitigate the loss of physical and human assets through injuries,accidents or other serious accidents. Attachments: Resolution FAX ASP 2020 49 CFR Part 673 City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Department of Transportation Fresno Area Express Public Transit Agency Safety Plan Adopted May 2020 Gregory A. Barfield Director of Transportation 1 Table of Contents Transit Agency Information ................................................................................................2 Plan Development, Approval and Updates ........................................................................3 Safety Management Policy ................................................................................................4 Safety Performance Targets ..............................................................................................7 Safety Risk Management ................................................................................................ 13 Safety Assurance ............................................................................................................ 17 Safety Promotion ............................................................................................................. 20 Additional Information ...................................................................................................... 22 Definitions and Acronyms of Terms Used in the ASP ..................................................... 23 2 1. Transit Agency Information Transit Agency Name Fresno Area Express (FAX) Transit Agency Address 2223 G Street, Fresno, California, 93706 Name and Title of Accountable Executive Gregory A. Barfield, Director of Transportation Name of Chief Safety Officer Olustee “Steve” Smith, Safety Officer Mode(s) of Service Covered by this Plan Fixed Route Bus (FAX) Paratransit (Handy Ride) Mode(s) of Service Provided by the Transit Agency (directly operated or contracted service) List All FTA Funding Types (e.g., 5307, 5337, 5339) 5307, 5310, 5339 Does the Agency Provide Transit Services on Behalf of Another Transit Agency or Entity? No Description of Arrangement(s) Name and Address of Transit Agency(ies) or Entity(ies) for which Services is Provided Not applicable 3 2. Plan Development, Approval, and Updates Name of Person(s) Who Drafted this plan Belinda McMillan Haener, Administrative Manager Olustee “Steve” Smith, Safety Officer Signature by the Accountable Executive Director of Transportation Date of Signature (Signature Here) July 20, 2020 Approval by Fresno City Council City Council Date of Approval Fresno City Council May 21, 2020 Relevant Documentation - A copy of the City Council Resolution approving the Agency Safety Plan (ASP) is maintained on file by the Director of Transportation and Chief Safety Officer - Staff Report Version Number and Updates Version Number Section/ Pages Affected Reason for Change Date Issued 1 Original July 2020 4 3. Safety Management Policy As a recipient of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funds, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) grants the FTA authority to establish and enforce a structured, comprehensive plan to oversee the safety of public transportation throughout the United States. As part of the safety oversight framework, MAP -21 requires recipients of FTA Chapter 53 funding to develop and implement a Public Transit Agency Safety Plan (PTASP) that addresses performance measures, strategies, and staff training opportunities. MAP-21 expands the regulatory authority of FTA to oversee safety, providing an opportunity for FTA to assist transit agencies in moving towards a more holistic, performance-based approach in Safety Management Systems (SMS). MAP -21 placed the FTA and the City of Fresno’s Department of Transportation (FAX) in a position to provide guidance that strengthens the use of safety data; ultimately, supporting management decisions, improves the commitment of transit leadership to safety, and fostering a culture of safety that promotes awareness and responsiveness to safety risks. The PTASP for FAX is consistent with an SMS approach to Safety Risk Ma nagement (SRM). SMS is an integrated collection of policies, processes, and behaviors that ensures a formalized, proactive and data-driven approach to SRM. The goal of SMS is to increase the safety of transit systems by proactively identifying, assessing a nd controlling safety risks. The SMS approach is a flexible and scalable component for transit agencies of all modes and is consistent with the basic requirements of MAP-21. Safety Management Policy Statement FA X commits to: - Support the management of safety through the provision of appropriate resources, which will result in an organizational culture that fosters safe practices, encourages effective employee safety reporting and communication, and actively manages safety with the utmost attention and prioritization; - Integrate the management of safety among the primary responsibilities of all managers and employees; - Clearly define for all staff (managers and employees) their accountabilities and responsibilities for the delivery of the organization ’s safety performance and the performance of the organization’s SMS; - Establish and operate hazard identification and analysis, and safety risk assessment activities, including an Employee Safety Reporting Program (ESRP) as a fundamental source for safety concerns and hazard identification, which will eliminate or mitigate the safety risk of the consequences of hazards resulting from 5 activities to a point that is consistent with the organization’s acceptable level of safety performance; - Ensure no action will be taken against any employee who discloses a safety concern through the ESRP, unless disclosure indicates, beyond any reasonable doubt, an illegal act, gross negligence, or a deliberate or willful disregard of regulations or procedures by the reporting employee; - Comply with, and wherever possible exceed, legislative and regulatory requirements and standards; - Ensure sufficiently skilled and trained human resources are available to implement safety management processes; - Ensure all staff is provided with adequate and appropriate safety -related information and training, are competent in safety management matters, and are allocated only tasks commensurate with their skills; - Establish and measure safety performance against realistic and data-driven safety performance indicators and safety performance through management processes , which ensure appropriate safety management action is taken and is effective; and - Ensure externally supplied systems and services to support operations are delivered meeting or exceeding safety performance standards. Gregory A. Barfield Date Director of Transportation 6 Safety Management Policy Communication The Chief Safety Officer, who leads the SMS activities, introduced staff to SMS principles in June 2018, at a leadership staff meeting. The Safety Management Policy Statement was also distributed to each employee in the form of a handout during the leadership staff meeting. FAX also posted copies of the Safety Management Policy Statement on bulletin boards at headquarters and in the Operations and Maintenance break areas of each division. FAX has incorporated review and distribution of the Safety Management Policy Statement into new-hire training and leadership team annual refresher training. Annual Review and Update of the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan The City of Fresno Department of Transportation (DOT) leadership will review, update, and implement any changes to the PTASP annually by July 1. The Director of Transportation will review and approve any changes, sign the new ASP, and forward to the FTA for review and approval. Any subsequent updates, addendums, adoption, and distribution activities will be documented in the Plan Development, Approval and Updated section found on page 3 of this PTASP. 7 4. Safety Performance Targets Safety Performance Targets Safety Performance Management (Safety PM) is part of the overall Transportation Performance Management (TPM) program, which Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) defines as a strategic approach and uses system information to make investment and policy decision, to achieve national performance goals. The following are performance targets based on the safety performance measures established under the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. Safety Events FY20 Goals represent a 10% reduction of FY19 actuals. FY20 VRM are estimated at 5,130,000, an approximate 10% increase. Data is derived from NTD data (major and non-major accidents, incidents, and mechanical failures). Safety Performance Target Coordination The Accountable Executive will share the ASP, including safety performance targets, with the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) in the service area, the Fresno Council of County Governments (FCOG), each year after its formal adoption by the City Council. The Accountable Executive also provides a copy of the formally adopted plan to Caltrans. States and transit agencies must make their safety performance targets available to states and MPO to aid in the planning process, and to the maximum extent practicable, transit agencies must coordinate with states and MPOs in the selection of state and MPO safety performance targets, per 49 CFR 673.15. FAX personnel are available to coordinate with Caltrans and the MPO in the selection of Caltrans and FCOG safety performance and targets upon request. Targets Transmitted to the State/MPO Fiscal Year of Performance Date Targets Transmitted 2020 Upon plan approval 2021 2022 Total Number Rate Per Vehicle Revenue Mile (VRM) Rate Per 100K VRMs Total Number Rate Per Vehicle Revenue Mile (VRM) Rate Per 100K VRMs Number of Passenger Injuries Per Year 47 0.00001008 1.01 42 0.00000819 0.81871345 Number of Vehicle Collisions Per Year 19 0.00000407 0.41 17 0.00000331 0.331384016 Total Accidents/ Incidents Per Year 51 0.00001093 1.09 46 0.00000897 0.89668616 Number of Fatalities Per Year 0 0.00000000 0.00 0 0.00000000 0 Number of Road Calls Per Year 476 0.00010206 10.21 428 0.00008343 8.343079922 FY 2019 Performance FY 2020 Goals 8 Authorities, Accountabilities, and Responsibilities Leadership has the overall responsibility of safe and secure transit operations of the FAX transit system. In compliance with the PTASP, each of the following positions has specific system safety accountabilities and responsibilities depending on their title, in compliance with the PTASP. Director of Transportation The Director of Transportation at FAX serves as an Accountable Executive with the following authorities, accountabilities, and responsibilities under this plan: - Accountable Executive for each site operation - Decision-making regarding resources (e.g., people and funds) to support asset management SMS activities, and capital investments - Signing SMS implementation planning documents - Endorsing SMS implementation team membership - Communicate the importance of SMS to the business - Lead by example in promoting safe practices - Promoting health and well-being for all involved in transportation activities - Foster a positive safety culture within the business Chief Safety Officer or SMS Executive The Accountable Executive designates the Chief Safety Officer. The Chief Safety Officer has the following authorities, accountabilities, and responsibilities under this plan: - Developing and maintaining SMS documents - Proportioning safety awareness throughout the organization - Directing hazard identification and safety risk mitigation activities - Monitoring safety risk mitigation activities - Providing periodic reports on safety performance 9 - Briefing the Accountable Executive and Board on SMS implementation progress - Communicating changes in safety documents to all personnel - Ensuring safety documentation is current and accessible to all employees - Providing leadership in the operation and performance of SMS - Management and oversight of SMS - Leadership by example in promoting safe work practices - Staying up to date with best safety practices - Promoting health and well-being for all involved in the DOT Agency Leadership and Executive Management Agency Leadership and Executive Management also have authorities and responsibilities for day- to-day SMS implementation and operation of the SMS under this plan. FAX Agency Leadership and Executive Management include: - Assistant Directors - Administrative Manager - Operations Manager - Maintenance Manager - Planning Manager - Personnel Manager FAX Leadership and Executive Management personnel have the following authorities, accountabilities, and responsibilities: - Participate as members of the FAX Safety Committee (Operations Manager and supervisors will be rotated through the Safety Committee on a one-year term and other positions are permanent members) - Complete training on SMS and ASP elements - Oversee day-to-day operations of the SMS in their divisions. - Modify policies in their divisions consistent with implementation of the SMS, as necessary - Provide subject matter expertise to support implementation of the SMS as requested by the Accountable Executive or the Chief 10 Safety Officer, including SRM activities, investigation of safety events, development of safety risk mitigations, and monitoring of mitigation effectiveness Key Staff and Activities FAX uses the Safety Committee, as well as regular bus driver meetings, driver alert bulletins, and bi- monthly leadership meetings, to support its SMS and safety programs: - Safety Committee: Any safety hazards reported will be jointly evaluated by the Safety Committee and the Chief Safety Officer during a bi-monthly meeting. The Safety Committee members include the Chief Safety Officer, Assistant Director of Operations, the Operations Manager, a representative from dispatch, a representative from fixed route, and a representative from Amalgamated Transit Union leadership who meet bi-monthly to review issues and make recommendations to improve safety. - Driver Meetings: A permanent agenda item in all driver meetings is dedicated to safety. Safety issues are discussed and documented. - Bi-Monthly Leadership Meetings: Hazard reports and mitigations will be shared, safety topics will be brought up for open discussion, further feedback solicited, and hazard self-reporting further encouraged. Information discussed in these meetings will be documented. 11 Employee Safety Reporting Program The Employee Safety Reporting Program (ESRP) encourages employees who identify safety hazards in their day-to-day duties to report them to senior management in good faith, without concerns of consequences. The three ways employees can report safety conditions are: 1. Reporting directly to a dispatcher, who will add them to the daily Operations Log. 2. Reporting by filling out a FAX Safety Concern Reporting Form using their name or anonymously. This form can be filled out physically or online and submitted via email to faxsafety@fresno.gov. 3. Reporting conditions directly to any supervisor, manager, or director. Examples of information typically reported include: - Safety concerns in the operating environment (for example, road conditions or the condition of facilities or vehicles); - Policies and procedures that are not working as intended (for example, insufficient time to complete pre-trip inspection); - Events that senior managers might not otherwise know about (for example, near misses); and - Information about why a safety event occurred (for example, radio communication challenges). On a daily basis, the Chief Safety Officer reviews the dispatch daily Operatio ns Log, checks the comment box and dedicated e-mail address, and documents identified safety conditions in the Safety Risk database. The Chief Safety Officer, supported by the Safety Committee, will review and address each employee report, ensuring all employee hazard concerns and recommendations are appropriately identified and resolved through SRM process; reported deficiencies and non-compliance with rules or procedures are managed through the Safety Assurance process. The Chief Safety Officer discusses actions taken to address reported safety conditions during the quarterly leadership meetings. Additionally, if the reporting employee provided his or her name during the reporting process, the Chief Safety Officer or designee follows up directly with the employee when FAX determines whether the course of action and after any mitigations are implemented. FAX encourages participation in the ESRP by protecting employees who report safety conditions in good faith. However, FAX may take disciplinary action if the report involves any of the following: - Willful participation in illegal activity, such as assault or theft; - Gross negligence, such as knowingly utilizing heavy equipment for purposes other than intended such that people or property are put at risk; or - Deliberate or willful disregard of regulations. 12 FAX Safety Organizational Structure Gregory Barfield Director of Transportation Brian Barr Assistant Director Rodolfo Castro FAX Maintenance Manager Kristopher Grey Projects Administrator Belinda McMillan Haener Administarative Manager Robert Hogg Personnel Manager Olustee "Steve" Smith Safety Officer Joe Vargas Assistant Director Carolina Ilic Planning Manager Crystle Stidham Operations Manager Melissa Almaguar Training Officer Kayla Grimes Training Officer 13 5. Safety Risk Management Safety Risk Management Process FAX uses the SRM process as a primary method to ensure the safety of its operations, passengers, employees, vehicles, and facilities. It is a process whereby hazards and their consequences are identified, assessed for potential safety risk, and resolved in a manner acceptable to FAX’s leadership. The SRM process allows FAX to carefully examine what could cause harm and determine whether it has taken sufficient precautions to minimize the harm, or if further mitigations are necessary. The Chief Safety Officer leads the SRM process, working with the Safety Committee to identify hazards and consequences, assess safety risk of potential consequences, and mitigate safety risk. The results of the SRM process are documented in the Safety Risk database and referenced materials. The SRM process applies to all elements of its system, including operations and maintenance; facilities and vehicles; and personnel recruitment, training, and supervision. In carrying out the SRM process, FAX uses the following terms: - Event – Any accident, incident, or occurrence - Hazard – Any real or potential condition that can cause injury, illness, or death; damage to or loss of the facilities, equipment, rolling stock, or infrastructure belonging to FAX; or damage to the environment - Risk – Composite of predicted severity and likelihood of t he potential effect of a hazard - Risk Mitigation – Method(s) to eliminate or reduce the effects of hazards - Consequence – An effect of a hazard involving injury, illness, death, or damage to FAX property or the environment 14 Safety Hazard Identification The safety hazard identification process offers FAX the ability to identify hazards and potential consequences in the operation and maintenance of its system. Hazards can be identified through a variety of sources, including: - ESRP; - Review of vehicle camera footage; - Review of monthly performance data and safety performance targets; - Observations from supervisors; - Maintenance reports; - Comments from customers, passengers, and third parties, including transit insurance pool and vendors; - Safety Committee, Driver, and Staff Meetings; - Results of audits and inspections of vehicles and facilities; - Results of training assessments; - Investigations into safety events, incidents, and occurrences; and - FTA and other oversight authorities (mandatory information source). When a safety concern is observed by management or supervisory personnel, whatever the source, it is reported to the Chief Safety Officer. Procedures for reporting hazards to the Chief Safety Officer are reviewed during Leadership Meetings and in the Safety Committee. The Chief Safety Officer also receives employee reports from the ESRP, customer comments related to safety, and the dispatch daily Operations Log. The Chief Safety Officer reviews these sources for hazards and documents them in the Safety Risk Database. The Chief Safety Officer also may enter hazards into the Safety Risk Database based on his or her review of operations and maintenance, the results of audits and observations, and information received from FTA and other oversight authorities, as well as the National Transportation Safety Board. The Chief Safety Officer may conduct further analyses of hazards and consequences entered into the Safety Risk Database to collect information and identify additional consequences and to inform what hazards should be prioritized for safety risk assessment. In following up on identified hazards, the Chief Safety Officer may: - Reach out to the reporting party, if available, to gather all known information about the reported hazard; - Conduct a walk-through of the affected area, assessing the possible hazardous condition, generating visual documentation (photographs and/or video), and taking any measurements deemed necessary; - Conduct interviews with employees in the area to gather potentially relevant information on the reported hazard; - Review any documentation associated with the hazard (records, reports , procedures, inspections, technical documents, etc.); 15 - Contact other departments that may have association with or technical knowledge relevant to the reported hazard; - Review any past reported hazards of a similar nature; and - Evaluate tasks and/or processes associated with the reported hazard. The Chief Safety Officer will prepare an agenda to discuss identified hazards and consequences with the Safety Committee during bi-monthly meetings. This agenda may include additional background on the hazards and consequences, such as the results of trend analyses, vehicle camera footage, vendor documentation, reports and observations, or information supplied by FTA or other oversight authorities. Any identified hazard that poses a real and immediate threat to life, property, or the environment must immediately be brought to the attention of the Director of Transportation and addressed through the SRM process (with or without the full Safety Committee) for safety risk assessment and mitigation. This means the Chief Safety Officer believes immediate intervention is necessary to preserve life, prevent major property destruction, or avoid harm to the environment that would constitute a violation of Environmental Protection Agency or the City of Fresno’s environmental protection standards. Otherwise, the Safety Committee will prioritize hazards for further SRM activity. Safety Risk Assessment FAX assesses safety risk associated with identified safety hazards using its safety risk assessment process. This includes an assessment of the likelihood and severity of the consequences of hazards, including existing mitigations, and prioritizing hazards ba sed on safety risk. The Chief Safety Officer and Safety Committee assess prioritized hazards using the FAX Safety Risk Matrix. This matrix expresses assessed risk as a combination of one severity category and one likelihood level, also referred to as a hazard rating. For example, a risk may be assessed as “1A” or the combination of a Catastrophic (1) severity category and a Highly (A) probability level. This matrix also categorizes combined risks into levels (High, Medium, or Low) based on the likelihood of occurrence and severity of the outcome. For purposes of accepting risk: - “High” hazard ratings will be considered unacceptable and require action from FAX to mitigate the safety risk, - “Medium” hazard ratings will be considered undesirable and require the Safety Committee to make a decision regarding their acceptability, - “Low” hazard ratings may be accepted by the Chief Safety Officer without additional review, and - “Very Low” hazard ratings may be accepted by the Chief Officer without additional review. 16 Using a categorization of High, Medium, or Low allows for hazards to be prioritized for mitigation based on their associated safety risk. The Chief Safety Officer schedules safety risk assessment activities on the Safety Committee agenda and prepares a Safety Risk Assessment Package. This package is distributed at least one week in advance of the Safety Committee meeting. During the meeting, the Chief Safety Officer reviews the hazard and its consequence(s) and reviews available information distributed in the Safety Risk Assessment Package on severity and likelihood. The Chief Safety Officer may request support from members of the Safety Committee in obtaining additional information to support the safety risk assessment. Once sufficient information has been obtained, the Chief Safety Officer will facilitate completion of relevant sections of the Safety Risk database, using the Safety Risk Assessment Matrix, with the Safety Committee. The Chief Safety Officer will document the Safety Committee safety risk assessment, including hazard rating and mitigation options for each assessed safety hazard in the Safety R isk database. The Chief Safety Officer will maintain on file Safety Committee agendas, Safety Risk Assessment Packages, additional information collection, and completed Safety Risk database sections for a period of three years from the date of generation. Safety Risk Mitigation The Director of Transportation, Chief Safety Officer, and key staff review current methods of safety risk mitigation and establish methods or procedures to mitigate or eliminate safety risk associated with specific hazards based on recommendations from the Safety Committee. FAX can reduce safety risks by reducing the likelihood and/or severity of potential consequences of hazards. Prioritization of safety risk mitigations is based on the results of safety risk assessments. Chief Safety Officer tracks and updates safety risk mitigation information in the Safety Risk Database and makes the database available to the Safety Committee during monthly meetings and to FAX staff upon request. In the Safety Risk Database, the Chief Safety Officer will also document any specific measures or activities, such as reviews, observations, or audits, which will be conducted to monitor the effectiveness of mitigations once implemented. 17 6. Safety Assurance Safety Assurance Through its Safety Assurance process, FAX: - Evaluates its compliance with operations and maintenance procedures to determine whether existing rules and procedures are sufficient to control the safety risk; - Assesses the effectiveness of safety risk mitigations to make sure the mitigations are appropriate and are implemented as intended; - Investigates safety events to identify causal factors; and - Analyzes information from safety reporting, including data about safety failures, defects, or conditions. Safety Performance Monitoring and Measurement FAX has many processes in place to monitor its entire transit system for compliance with operations and maintenance procedures, including: - Safety audits, - Informal inspections, - Regular review of onboard camera footage to assess drivers and specific incidents, - Safety surveys, - ESRP, - Investigation of safety occurrences, - Safety review prior to the launch or modification of any facet of service, - Daily data gathering and monitoring of data related to the delivery of service, and - Regular vehicle inspections and preventative maintenance. - Results from the above processes are compared against recent performance trends quarterly and annually by the Chief Safety Officer to determine wh ere action needs to be taken. The Chief Safety Officer enters any identified non - compliant or ineffective activities, including mitigations, back into the SRM process for reevaluation by the Safety Committee. FAX monitors safety risk mitigations to determine if they have been implemented and are effective, appropriate, and working as intended. The Chief Safety Officer maintains a list of safety risk mitigations in the Safety Risk Database. The mechanism for monitoring safety risk mitigations varies depending on the mitigation. The Chief Safety Officer establishes one or more mechanisms for monitoring safety risk mitigations as part of the mitigation implementation process and assigns monitoring activities to the appropriate director, manager, or supervisor. These monitoring mechanisms may include tracking a specific metric on daily, weekly, or monthly logs or reports; conducting job performance observations; or other activities. 18 The Chief Safety Officer will endeavor to make use of existing FAX processes and activities before assigning new information collection activities. The Chief Safety Officer and Safety Committee review the performance of individual safety risk mitigations during Safety Committee meetings, based on the reporting schedule determined for each mitigation, and determine if a specific safety risk mitigation is not implemented or performing as intended. If the mitigation is not implemented or performing as intended, the Safety Committee will propose a course of action to modify the mitigation or take other action to manage the safety risk. The Chief Safety Officer will approve or modify this proposed course of action and oversee its execution. The Chief Safety Officer and Safety Committee also monitor the operations on a large scale to identify mitigations that may be ineffective, inappropriate, or not implemented as intended by: - Reviewing results from accident, incident, and occurrence investigations; - Monitoring employee safety reporting; - Reviewing results of internal safety audits and inspections; and - Analyzing operational and safety data to identify emerging safety concerns. - The Chief Safety Officer works with the Safety Committee and Accountable Executive to carry out and document all monitoring activities. FAX maintains documented procedures for conducting safety investigations of events (accidents, incidents, and occurrences, as defined by FTA) to find causal and contributing factors and review the existing mitigations in place at the time of the event. These procedures also reflect all traffic safety reporting and investigation requirements established by California Department of Motor Vehicles. The Chief Safety Officer maintains all documentation of investigation policies, processes, forms, checklists, activities, and results. As detailed in the procedures, an investigation report is prepared and sent to the Accident Review Committee (ARC) for integration into its analysis of the event. ARC consists of seven members who represent management, FAX training officers, ATU leadership/designee, operations, and law enforcement. The Chief Safety Officer chairs the board. ARC determines whether: - The accident was preventable or non-preventable; - Personnel require discipline or retraining; - The causal factor(s) indicate(s) a safety hazard contributed to or was present during the event; and - The accident appears to involve underlying organizational causal factors beyond a solely individual employee behavior. The Chief Safety Officer and Safety Committee routinely review safety data captured in employee safety reports, safety meeting minutes, customer complaints, and other safety 19 communication channels. When necessary, the Chief Safety Officer and Safety Committee ensure the concerns are investigated or analyzed through the FAX SRM process. The Chief Safety Officer and Safety Committee also review internal and external reviews, including audits and assessments, with findings concerning safety performance, compliance with operations and maintenance procedures, or the effectiveness of safety risk mitigations. 20 7. Safety Promotion Competencies and Training The comprehensive safety training program applies to all FAX employees directly responsible for safety, including, but not limited to: - Bus vehicle operators (drivers), - Dispatchers, - Maintenance technicians, - General office staff, - Managers and supervisors, - Agency Leadership and Executive Management, - Chief Safety Officer, and - Director of Transportation FAX dedicates resources to conduct a comprehensive safety training program, as well as training on the SMS roles and responsibilities. The scope of the safety training, including annual refresher training, is appropriate to each employee’s individual safety - related job responsibilities and his or her role in the SMS. Basic training requirements for FAX employees, including frequencies and refresher training, are documented in the Safety Training Matrix and the Employee Handbook. Operations safety-related skill training includes the following: - New-hire bus vehicle operator classroom and hands-on skill training, - Bus vehicle operator refresher training, - Bus vehicle operator retraining (recertification or return to work), - Classroom and on-the-job training for dispatchers, - Classroom and on-the-job training for operations supervisors and managers, and - Accident investigation training for operations supervisors and managers. Vehicle maintenance safety-related skill training includes the following: - Ongoing vehicle maintenance technician skill training, - Ongoing skill training for vehicle maintenance supervisors, - Accident investigation training for vehicle maintenance supervisors, - Ongoing hazardous material training for vehicle maintenance technicians and supervisors, and - Training provided by vendors. FAX Accountable Executive and Agency Leadership and Executive Management team must complete the FTA SMS Awareness online training and an executive session on safety management sponsored by the FAX transit insurance pool. 21 Safety Communication The Chief Safety Officer and Administrative Manager coordinate safety communication activities for the SMS. FAX activities focus on the three categories of communicatio n activity established in 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 673: - Communicating safety and safety performance information throughout the agency: FAX communicates information on safety and safety performance in its quarterly newsletter and during staff meetings. FAX also has a permanent agenda item on all Drivers’ Meetings dedicated to safety. Information typically conveyed during these meetings includes safety performance statistics, lessons learned from recent occurrences, upcoming events that may impact FAX service or safety performance, and updates regarding SMS implementation. FAX also requests information from drivers during these meetings, which is recorded in meeting minutes. Finally, the Administrative Division posts safety bulletins and flyers on the bulletin boards located in all bus operator and maintenance break rooms, advertising safety messages and promoting awareness of safety issues. - Communicating information on hazards and safety risks relevant to employees' roles and responsibilities throughout the agency: As part of new-hire training, FAX distributes safety policies and procedures, included in the Employee Handbook, to all employees. FAX provides training on these policies and procedures and discu sses them during safety talks between supervisors and bus operators and vehicle technicians. For newly -emerging issues or safety events at the agency, the Chief Safety Officer issues bulletins or messages to employees that are reinforced by supervisors in one-on-one or group discussions with employees. - Informing employees of safety actions taken in response to reports submitted through the ESRP: FAX provides targeted communications to inform employees of safety actions taken in response to reports submitted through the ESRP, including handouts , flyers, safety talks, updates to bulletin boards, and one-on-one discussions between employees and supervisors. 22 8. Additional Information Supporting Documentation The City of Fresno will maintain documentation related to the implementation of its SMS; the programs, policies, and procedures used to carry out this ASP; and the results from its SMS process and activities pursuant to the City of Fresno’s record retention schedule, which is detailed under Resolution No. 2008-243 of the Council of the City of Fresno . Said documentation will be available to the FTA or other Federal or oversight entity upon request. 23 9. Acronyms and Definitions of Terms Used in the ASP Definitions Accident: Event that involves any of the following: a loss of life; a report of a serious injury to a person; a collision of public transportation vehicles; an evacuation for life - safety reasons. Accountable Executive: The single, identifiable person who has ultimate responsibility for carrying out the PTASP of the agency; responsibility for carrying out the agency’s Transit Asset Management Plan; and control or direction over the human and capital resources needed to develop and maintain both the agency’s PTASP, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. section 5329(d), and the agency’s Transit Asset Management Plan in accordance with 49 U.S.C. section 5326. Agency or Transit Agency: City of Fresno Department of Transportation/FAX. Chief Safety Officer: The adequately trained individual who has responsibility for safety and reports directly to the transit agency chief executive officer. City Council: Governing body of City of Fresno Department of Transportation/FAX. Event: Any accident, incident, or occurrence. Federal Transit Administration: An operating administration within the United States Department of Transportation. Hazard: Any real or potential condition that can cause injury, illness, or death, damage to or loss of the facilities, equipment, rolling stock, or infrastructure of the system, or damage to the environment. Incident: An event that involves any of the following: a personal injury that is not a serious injury, one or more injuries requiring medical transport, or damage to facilities, equipment, rolling stock, or infrastructure that disrupts the operations of the transit agency. Investigation: The process of determining the causal and contributing factors of an accident, incident, or hazard for the purpose of preventing recurrence and mitigating risk. National Public Transportation Safety Plan: The plan to improve the safety of all public transportation systems that receive federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53. Occurrence: An event without any personal injury in which any damage to facilities, equipment, rolling stock, or infrastructure does not disrupt th e operations of the transit agency. 24 Definitions Part 673: 49 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 673. Performance Measure: An expression based on a quantifiable indicator of performance or condition that is used to establish targets and to assess progress toward meeting the established targets. Performance Target: A quantifiable level of performance or condition, expressed as a value for the measure, to be achieved within a time period required by the FTA. Risk: The composite of predicted severity and likelihood of the potential effect of a hazard. Risk Mitigation: A method or methods to eliminate or reduce the effects of hazards. Safety Assurance: Processes within the transit agency Safety Management Systems that function to ensure the implementation and effectiveness of safety risk mitigation, and to ensure the transit agency meets or exceeds its safety objectives through the collection, analysis, and assessment of information. Safety Management Policy: The transit agency’s documented commitment to safety, which defines its safety objectives and the accountabilities and responsibilities of its employees with regard to safety. Safety Management Systems: The formal, top-down, organization-wide approach to managing safety risk and assuring the effectiveness of the transit agency’s safety risk mitigation. SMS includes systematic procedures, practices, and policies for managing risks and hazards. Safety Performance Target: A performance target related to safety management activities. Safety Promotion: A combination of training and communication of safety information to support SMS as applied to the transit agency’s public transportation system. Safety Risk Assessment: Means the formal activity whereby the transit agency determines Safety Risk Management priorities by establishing the significance or value of its safety risks. Safety Risk Management: A process within the transit agency’s PTASP for identifying hazards and analyzing, assessing, and mitigating safety risk. Serious Injury: Any injury that: (1) requires hospitalization for more than 48 hours, commencing within seven days from the date the injury was received ; (2) results in a 25 Definitions fracture of any bone (except simple fractures of fingers, toes, or noses); (3) causes severe hemorrhages, nerve, muscle, or tendon damage; (4) involves any internal organ ; or (5) involves second or third-degree burns, or any burns affecting more than five percent of the body surface. State of Good Repair: The condition in which a capital asset is able to operate at a full level of performance. Transit Asset Management Plan: The strategic and systematic practice of procuring, operating, inspecting, maintaining, rehabilitating, and replacing transit capital assets to manage their performance, risks, and costs over their life cycles, for the purpose of providing safe, cost-effective, and reliable public transportation, as required by 49 U.S.C. section 5326 and 49 CFR Part 625. 26 Acronyms ARC Accident Review Committee CFR Code of Federal Regulations DOT Department of Transportation ESRP Employee Safety Reporting Program FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration PTASP Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan Safety PM Safety Performance Management SMS Safety Management Systems SGR State of Good Repair SPT Safety Performance Target SRA Safety Risk Assessment SRM Safety Risk Management TPM Transportation Performance Management U.S.C. United States Code 34418 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations 1 See United States Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, ‘‘Table 2–1: Transportation Fatalities by Mode 1960–2016,’’ at https://www.bts.gov/archive/publications/national_ transportation_statistics/table_02_01; and ‘‘Table DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Transit Administration 49 CFR Part 673 [Docket No. FTA–2015–0021] RIN 2132–AB23 Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is publishing a final rule for Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans as authorized by the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP–21). This final rule requires States and certain operators of public transportation systems that receive Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 to develop Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans based on the Safety Management System approach. Operators of public transportation systems will be required to implement the safety plans. The development and implementation of safety plans will help ensure that public transportation systems are safe nationwide. DATES: The effective date of this rule is July 19, 2019. FTA’s Office of Transit Safety and Oversight (TSO) will host a series of webinars to discuss the requirements of the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP) final rule. The first two webinars will be held at 2 p.m. on Wednesday, July 25, 2018 and Tuesday, July 31, 2018. ADDRESSES: To register for webinars and for information about future webinars, please visit https://www.transit.dot.gov/ about/events. FTA is committed to providing equal access for all webinar participants. If you need alternative formats, options, or services, contact FTA-Knowledge@ dot.gov at least three business days prior to the event. If you have any questions, please email FTA-Knowledge@dot.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact PTASP_ QA@dot.gov. For program matters, contact Adrianne Malasky, Office of Transit Safety and Oversight, (202) 366– 1783 or Adrianne.Malasky@dot.gov. For legal matters, contact Michael Culotta, Office of Chief Counsel, (212) 668–2170 or Michael.Culotta@dot.gov. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Executive Summary A. Purpose of Regulatory Action B. Legal Authority C. Summary of Major Provisions 1. Summary of the Final Rule 2. Summary of Public Comments 3. Summary of the Major Changes to the Rule D. Costs and Benefits II. Background III. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Response to Relevant Comments A. Scope and Applicability of Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans 1. Section 5310, Section 5311, Small Section 5307, and Tribal Operators 2. Commuter Rail and Passenger Ferry Service 3. Contracted Service B. Definitions 1. Accident 2. Incident 3. Occurrence 4. Serious Injury 5. Accountable Executive 6. Chief Safety Officer 7. Operator of a Public Transportation System 8. Rail Transit Agency 9. Performance Target, Safety Performance Target, and Performance Criteria 10. Small Public Transportation Provider 11. Requests for New Definitions C. General Requirements 1. Role of the Accountable Executive 2. Approval of a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan 3. Documentation of SMS Processes and Activities 4. Safety Performance Targets 5. Future Requirements in FTA’s Public Transportation Safety Program and National Public Transportation Safety Plan 6. Process and Timeline for Annual Review and Update 7. Emergency Preparedness and Response Plans 8. Multiple Modes of Transit Service D. State and Transit Agency Roles 1. Large Transit Agencies 2. Small Public Transportation Providers, Section 5311 Providers, and Section 5310 Providers 2.1. States Must Draft and Certify Safety Plans on Behalf of Small Public Transportation Providers 2.1.1. Option for State-Wide or Agency- Specific Safety Plans 2.1.2. Drafting and Certifying Safety Plans for Small Section 5307 Providers 2.2. Other Comments 3. Small Transit Providers May Draft and Certify Their Own Safety Plans 4. Direct and Designated Recipients Drafting and Certifying Safety Plans on Behalf of Smaller Transit Providers E. Existing System Safety Program Plan Is Effective for One Year 1. General Comments 2. One-Year Compliance Timeframe F. Certification of Safety Plans G. SSOA Review and Approval of PTASPs for Rail Transit Systems H. Safety Performance Targets and Performance-Based Planning I. Safety Management Systems 1. Safety Management Policy: General Comments 1.1. Safety Management Policy Statement 1.2. Employee Reporting Program 1.3. Safety Accountabilities and Responsibilities 2. Safety Risk Management 2.1. Safety Risk Management: General Comments 2.2. Safety Hazard Identification and Analysis 3. Safety Assurance 3.1. Safety Assurance: Safety Performance Monitoring and Measurement 3.2. Safety Assurance: Management of Change 3.3. Safety Assurance: Continuous Improvement 4. Safety Promotion 5. Scalability of SMS 6. SMS and Safety Culture J. Safety Plan Documentation and Recordkeeping 1. Safety Plan Documentation 2. Safety Plan Records 3. Other Comments on Documentation and Recordkeeping 4. Database Systems 5. Staffing and Resources as a Result of Documentation and Recordkeeping K. Funding L. Staffing M. Enforcement and Oversight 1. Triennial Reviews and State Management Reviews 2. State Oversight 3. Other Comments N. NTD Reporting O. Security P. SSPP–PTASP Crosswalk Q. Safety Performance Measures R. Technical Assistance and Guidance S. Coordination With Other Entities T. Nexus Between the PTASP Rule and Other FTA Requirements U. Americans With Disabilities Act Issues V. Other Comments on the Rule W. Regulatory Impact Analyses 1. Costs 2. Benefits 3. Regulatory Flexibility Act X. Tribal Issues 1. Applicability of the Rule to Tribes 2. The State’s Role in Tribal Safety Plans 3. Financial Impact on Tribes 4. Tribal Consultation IV. Section-by-Section Analysis V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices I. Executive Summary A. Purpose of Regulatory Action The public transportation industry remains among the safest surface transportation modes in terms of total reported safety events, fatalities, and injuries.1 Nonetheless, given public VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34419 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations 1–40: U.S. Passenger Miles (Millions) 1960–2015,’’ at https://www.bts.gov/archive/publications/ national_transportation_statistics/table_01_40. transportation service complexities, the condition of transit equipment and facilities, turnover in the transit workforce, and the quality of policies, procedures, and training, the public transportation industry remains vulnerable to catastrophic accidents. This rule outlines requirements for Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans that would carry out explicit statutory mandates in the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (Pub. L. 112–141; July 6, 2012) (MAP–21), which was reauthorized by the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (Pub. L. 114–94; December 4, 2015) (FAST Act) and codified at 49 U.S.C. 5329(d), to strengthen the safety of public transportation systems that receive Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53. This rule requires the adoption of Safety Management Systems (SMS) principles and methods; the development, certification, implementation, and update of Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans; and the coordination of Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan elements with other FTA programs and rules, as specified in 49 U.S.C. 5303, 5304, and 5329. B. Legal Authority In Section 20021 of MAP–21, which is codified at 49 U.S.C. 5329, Congress directed FTA to establish a comprehensive Public Transportation Safety Program, one element of which is the requirement for Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5329(d), FTA must issue a final rule requiring operators of public transportation systems that receive financial assistance under Chapter 53 to develop and certify Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans. C. Summary of Major Provisions 1. Summary of the Final Rule This rule adds a new part 673, ‘‘Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans,’’ to Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The rule implements the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d). One year after the effective date of this rule, each State, local governmental authority, and any other operator of a public transportation system that receives Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53, must certify that it has established a comprehensive Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP). 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1). At this time, the rule does not apply to an operator of a public transportation system that only receives Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5310 (Section 5310), 49 U.S.C. 5311 (Section 5311), or both 49 U.S.C. 5310 and 49 U.S.C. 5311. Large transit providers must develop their own plans, have the plans approved by their Boards of Directors (or equivalent authorities), and certify to FTA that those plans are in place and comply with this part. Small public transportation providers that receive Urbanized Area Formula Program under 49 U.S.C. 5307 may have their plans drafted or certified by the State in which they operate. A small public transportation provider may opt to draft and certify its own plan. At a minimum, and consistent with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d), each Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan must: •Include the documented processes and procedures for the transit agency’s Safety Management System, which consists of four main elements: (1) Safety Management Policy, (2) Safety Risk Management, (3) Safety Assurance, and (4) Safety Promotion, as discussed in more detail below (49 CFR 673.11(a)(2)); •Include performance targets based on the safety performance criteria established under the National Public Transportation Safety Plan (49 CFR 673.11(a)(3)); •Address all applicable requirements and standards as set forth in FTA’s Public Transportation Safety Program and National Public Transportation Safety Plan (49 CFR 673.11(a)(4)); and •Establish a process and timeline for conducting an annual review and update of the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (49 CFR 673.11(a)(5)). Each rail transit agency must include in its Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan an emergency preparedness and response plan, as historically required by FTA under the former regulatory provisions of the State Safety Oversight rule at 49 CFR part 659 (49 CFR 673.11(a)(6)). A transit agency may develop one Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for all modes of its service, or it may develop a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for each mode of service that is not subject to safety regulation by another Federal entity. 49 CFR 673.11(b). A transit agency must maintain records associated with its Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan. 49 CFR 673 subpart D. Any rail fixed guideway public transportation system that had a System Safety Program Plan (SSPP) compliant with the former regulatory provisions of 49 CFR part 659 as of October 1, 2012, may keep that plan in effect until one year after the effective date of this rule. 49 CFR 673.11(e). A transit agency that operates passenger ferry service regulated by the United States Coast Guard (USCG) or rail fixed guideway public transportation service regulated by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is not required to develop a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for those modes of service. 49 CFR 673.11(f). States and transit agencies must make their safety performance targets available to States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) to aid in the planning process, and to the maximum extent practicable, States and transit agencies must coordinate with States and MPOs in the selection of State and MPO safety performance targets. 49 CFR 673.15. On an annual basis, transit agencies and States must certify compliance with this rule. 49 CFR 673.13. 2. Summary of Public Comments On February 5, 2016, FTA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans. 81 FR 6344 (https://www.gpo.gov/ fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-02-05/pdf/2016- 02017.pdf). The public comment period closed on April 5, 2016. FTA received approximately 647 comments from approximately 77 entities, including States, transit agencies, trade associations, and individuals. The majority of the comments addressed the administration of the rule. Over 100 comments focused on definitions, with the vast majority of those commenters requesting FTA to align terms and definitions with the terms and definitions that FTA recently finalized in other rules, such as the State Safety Oversight rule at 49 CFR part 674 and the Transit Asset Management rule at 49 CFR part 625. FTA received nearly 300 comments on issues relating to (1) the effective date and compliance date of the rule; (2) the drafting and certification of safety plans on behalf of recipients of FTA’s Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Program at 49 U.S.C. 5310 and other smaller recipients; (3) clarification of FTA’s oversight process; (4) the need for FTA’s technical assistance; (5) documentation and recordkeeping; and (6) the applicability of the rule. FTA received over 80 comments on SMS. Many of the commenters expressed support for SMS, particularly given its flexibility and scalability. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34420 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations Some commenters requested clarification of the flexibility and scalability of SMS, and to that end, they requested that FTA develop and issue a safety plan template. Other commenters requested clarification regarding specific provisions of SMS. In the NPRM, FTA sought comments on alternative regulatory frameworks to SMS, and in response to this request, FTA received no comments. Detailed comment summaries and responses are below. 3. Summary of the Major Changes to the Rule In response to the public comments, FTA made a number of changes to the rule. Below is a summary of those changes, which are discussed in more detail in the sections that follow. Section 673.1 Applicability In the NPRM, FTA proposed to apply the rule to every ‘‘State, local governmental authority, and any other operator of a public transportation system that receives Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53.’’ FTA specifically asked the public whether the rule should apply to recipients and subrecipients of funds under FTA’s Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Program at 49 U.S.C. 5310 (Section 5310). FTA also specifically asked the public for alternative regulatory frameworks that satisfy the statutory requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5329 and are tailored to fit the needs of smaller operators of public transportation. FTA received numerous comments in response to these questions and the regulatory proposal. Several commenters suggested that FTA exempt Section 5310 recipients from the rule because they are smaller non-traditional transit providers. Several commenters suggested that FTA adopt a more streamlined and simplified approach that is more tailored for smaller operators. At least one commenter suggested that FTA exempt subrecipients of Section 5311 Rural Area Formula Program funds from the rule. In light of these public comments and the need for further evaluation, FTA is deferring regulatory action at this time on operators of public transportation systems that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds. This deferral will provide FTA time to further evaluate information and safety data related to these systems to determine the appropriate level of regulatory burden necessary to address the safety risk presented by these systems. Thus, this final rule does not address operators of public transportation systems that only receive Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5310, 49 U.S.C. 5311, or both 49 U.S.C. 5310 and 49 U.S.C. 5311. Section 673.5 Definitions FTA updated the definitions of the terms ‘‘Accountable Executive’’ and ‘‘Transit Asset Management Plan,’’ and FTA changed the term ‘‘Performance Criteria’’ to ‘‘Performance Measure,’’ in an effort to align these terms and definitions with those in FTA’s Transit Asset Management rule at 49 CFR part 625, which was published on July 26, 2016. FTA updated the definition of the term ‘‘Safety Risk Management,’’ added the term ‘‘Rail Fixed Guideway Public Transportation System,’’ and changed the term ‘‘Safety Risk’’ to ‘‘Risk’’ in an effort to align these terms and definitions with those in FTA’s State Safety Oversight rule at 49 CFR part 674, which was published on March 16, 2016. FTA clarified in its definition of ‘‘Safety Management System Executive’’ that it means a ‘‘Chief’’ Safety Officer or an equivalent. FTA changed the term ‘‘Safety Risk Evaluation’’ to ‘‘Safety Risk Assessment’’ to add clarity to the final rule. In the NPRM, FTA proposed to define ‘‘operator of a public transportation system’’ to exclude operators that ‘‘provide service that is closed to the general public and only available for a particular clientele.’’ This language was intended to narrow the type of Section 5310 recipients that would be subject to the rule. In light of FTA’s decision to defer action on the applicability of the rule to all Section 5310 recipients and subrecipients—including operators that ‘‘provide service that is closed to the general public and only available for a particular clientele’’—FTA is removing this language from the definition of ‘‘operator of a public transportation system.’’ In the NPRM, FTA proposed to define ‘‘Small Public Transportation Provider’’ to mean ‘‘a recipient or subrecipient of Urbanized Area Formula Program funds under 49 U.S.C. 5307 that has one hundred (100) or fewer vehicles in revenue service and does not operate a rail fixed guideway public transportation system.’’ In response to public comments and for consistency with the Transit Asset Management Rule (81 FR 48889), FTA changed the definition of the term ‘‘Small Public Transportation Provider’’ to mean 100 or fewer vehicles in ‘‘peak’’ revenue service, as opposed to revenue service generally. Section 673.11(a)(6) General Requirements: Emergency Preparedness and Response Plans Based on public comments, FTA will provide rail transit agencies with the option to either include an emergency preparedness and response plan as a section of their Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan, or they may incorporate an existing emergency preparedness and response plan into their Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan by reference. Section 673.11(d) General Requirements; §673.13 Certification of Compliance: The Drafting and Certification of Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans on Behalf of Section 5310 Recipients and Subrecipients In the NPRM, FTA proposed to require States to draft and certify safety plans on behalf of certain recipients and subrecipients of funds under Section 5310 and the Section 5311 Formula Grants for Rural Areas Program. In light of the public comments from these recipients requesting exemptions from the rule and a more streamlined and tailored regulatory approach for smaller operators, and given FTA has decided to defer action on applicability of the rule to Section 5310 and Section 5311 recipients and subrecipients, FTA does not need to require States to draft and certify safety plans for those recipients and subrecipients at this time. Section 673.23(a) Safety Management Policy In the NPRM, FTA proposed to require transit agencies to develop a written Safety Management Policy, which would include safety performance targets. FTA received numerous comments noting that FTA also was proposing to require transit agencies to set safety performance targets in the General Requirements section of the rule, so the requirement in the Safety Management Policy section appeared redundant. FTA agrees, and to eliminate any redundancies, FTA deleted that requirement from the Safety Management Policy section of the rule. Section 673.25 Safety Risk Management In response to comments, FTA revised its Safety Risk Management requirements to add clarity to the safety hazard identification, safety risk assessment, and safety risk mitigation processes in the final rule. Section 673.27 Safety Assurance In the NPRM, FTA proposed to require all transit agencies to develop VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34421 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations and implement a comprehensive Safety Assurance process. FTA proposed to require all transit agencies to develop and implement processes for (1) safety performance monitoring and measurement, (2) management of change, and (3) continuous improvement. FTA received comments seeking clarity on one of the requirements related to safety performance monitoring and measurement, specifically, the requirement for each transit agency to ‘‘[m]onitor its operations to identify hazards not identified through the Safety Risk Management process established in §673.25 of this subpart.’’ 49 CFR 673.27(b)(2) (as proposed in the NPRM). Some commenters suggested that this requirement appeared redundant and duplicative of each of the requirements under Safety Risk Management. FTA agrees with these commenters, and to add clarity, reduce redundancy, and lower burdens, FTA eliminated this requirement from the final rule. More significantly, FTA received numerous comments requesting a reduction in the regulatory requirements for small public transportation providers. Given the limited administrative and financial resources available to small public transportation providers, FTA believes that a reduction in their regulatory burdens is appropriate. To that end, and to address the concerns expressed by commenters, FTA eliminated significant Safety Assurance requirements for all small public transportation providers. In the final rule, small public transportation providers only need to develop processes for safety performance monitoring and measurement. Small public transportation providers are not required to develop and implement processes for management of change and continuous improvement. FTA believes that these changes in the final rule will reduce their burdens significantly. Rail fixed guideway public transportation systems and recipients and subrecipients of Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 that have more than one hundred vehicles in peak revenue service must develop and implement Safety Assurance processes that include all of the regulatory requirements under 49 CFR 673.27, specifically, processes for safety performance monitoring and measurement, management of change, and continuous improvement. Section 673.29(a) Safety Promotion In the NPRM, FTA proposed to require transit agencies to establish comprehensive safety training programs for staff and contractors directly responsible for ‘‘the management of’’ safety. FTA received several comments expressing confusion over this requirement and the requirements of FTA’s proposed Safety Certification Training Program Rule, which applies to staff and contractors who responsible for safety ‘‘oversight’’ on rail transit systems. In an effort to respond to the commenters and to eliminate confusion, FTA struck the language ‘‘the management of’’ from the rule, so it now requires safety training for staff and contractors who are ‘‘directly responsible for safety.’’ Section 673.31 Safety Plan Documentation In the NPRM, FTA proposed to require transit agencies to maintain their safety plan documents for a minimum of three years. To add clarity in the final rule, FTA is requiring transit agencies to maintain safety plan documents for three years ‘‘after they are created.’’ Also, in the NPRM, FTA proposed to require a number of additional records related to a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan. Specifically, FTA proposed to require transit agencies to maintain records related to (1) safety risk mitigations, (2) results of safety performance assessments, and (3) employee safety training. FTA received numerous comments requesting reduced recordkeeping burdens. FTA also received numerous comments, in general, from smaller transit operators requesting reduced regulatory burdens. Upon review of these comments, FTA has eliminated the recordkeeping requirements in proposed 49 CFR 673.33 in their entirety. FTA believes that the records developed and maintained in accordance with 49 CFR 673.31 are sufficient to ensure that transit agencies are complying with the requirements of the statute and this final rule. FTA believes that this change in the final rule significantly will reduce the administrative, financial, and regulatory burdens on all transit operators. D. Costs and Benefits As discussed in greater detail below, FTA was able to estimate some but not all of the rule’s costs. FTA was able to estimate the costs for transit agencies to develop and implement Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans, which are approximately $41 million in the first year, and $30 million in each subsequent year, with annualized costs of $31 million discounted at 7 percent. These costs result from developing and certifying safety plans, documenting SMS processes and procedures, implementing SMS, and maintaining records. FTA was not able to estimate the costs of actions that transit agencies would be required to take to mitigate risk as a result of implementing this rule, such as vehicle modifications, additional training, technology investments, or changes to operating procedures and practices. It is not possible for FTA to anticipate the strategies and actions agencies may adopt to address safety risks, or the time period over which these actions would occur. FTA was unable to quantify the rule’s benefits. To estimate safety benefits, one would need information regarding the causes of safety events and the factors that may cause future events. This information is generally unavailable in the public transportation sector, given the infrequency and diversity of the type of safety events that occur. In addition, one would need information about the safety problems that agencies are likely to find through implementation of their safety plans and the actions agencies are likely to take to address those problems. Instead of quantifying benefits, FTA estimated the potential safety benefits. The potential safety benefits are an estimate of the cost of all bus and rail safety events over a future 20-year period. The estimate is an extrapolation of the total cost of bus and rail events that occurred from 2010 to 2016. Table 1 below shows the summary of the Costs and the Potential Benefits. The benefits of the rule primarily will result from mitigating actions, which largely are not accounted for in this analysis. FTA has not estimated the benefits of implementing the rule without mitigating actions, but expects they are unlikely to be large. Estimated costs for agencies’ safety plans include certain activities that could yield safety improvements, such as improved communication, identification of hazards, and greater employee awareness, as well as increased accountability at the higher echelons of the organization. It is plausible that these activities alone could produce accident reductions that surpass the cost of developing the plan, though even greater reductions could be achieved in concert with other mitigating actions. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34422 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF THE COSTS AND THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS IF ADDITIONAL UNQUANTIFIED MITIGATION INVESTMENTS OCCUR [2016 Dollars] Current dollar value 7% Dis- counted value 3% Dis- counted value Qualitative Benefits ......................................................................................................................•Reduced bus and rail safety incidents with mitigation actions. •Reduced delays in operations. Estimated Costs (20-Year Estimate) ........................................................................................... $602,485,710 $323,732,747 $450,749,898 Unquantified Costs ......................................................................................................................•Investments associated with mitigating safety risks (such as additional training, vehicle modification, operational changes, maintenance, and information dissemination). Estimated Cost (Annualized) ....................................................................................................... ........................ 30,558,081 30,297,473 II. Background On July 6, 2012, the President signed into law MAP–21 (Pub. L. 112–141). MAP–21 authorized a number of fundamental changes to the Federal transit programs at 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53. This rule addresses the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan within the Public Transportation Safety Program authorized under 49 U.S.C. 5329. This authority was reauthorized when the President signed into law the FAST Act on December 4, 2015. The Public Transportation Safety Program consists of several key elements: The National Public Transportation Safety Plan, authorized by 49 U.S.C. 5329(b); the Public Transportation Safety Certification Training Program, authorized by 49 U.S.C. 5329(c); the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans, authorized by 49 U.S.C. 5329(d); and the State Safety Oversight Program, authorized by 49 U.S.C. 5329(e). FTA has issued rules and guidance, and it will continue to issue rules and guidance, to carry out all of these plans and programs under the rulemaking authority of 49 U.S.C. 5329 and 5334(a)(11). On October 3, 2013, FTA issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) for Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans, the National Public Transportation Safety Plan, the Safety Certification Training Program, and a new Transit Asset Management System. 78 FR 61251 (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR- 2013-10-03/pdf/2013-23921.pdf). Through the ANPRM, FTA sought comments on 123 questions related to the implementation of the public transportation safety program and transit asset management; 42 of the 123 questions specifically were related to Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans. The public comment period for the ANPRM closed on January 2, 2014. In response to the ANPRM, FTA received comments from 167 entities, including States, transit agencies, trade associations, and individuals. Following a comprehensive review of the comments, FTA issued several NPRMs for safety and transit asset management. In particular, FTA issued the NPRM for Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans on February 5, 2016. In this NPRM, FTA addressed comments related to the 42 questions in the ANPRM on Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans, specifically, question numbers 8–10, 17–31, 33–44, 47, 107–110, 112, and 116–121. Through the NPRM, FTA proposed to create a new part 673 in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which would require each operator of a public transportation system to develop and implement a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan. FTA proposed specific requirements for these safety plans in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d), including the following minimum requirements: •An approval by the transit agency’s board of directors, or an equivalent entity, and a signature from the transit agency’s Accountable Executive; •Documented processes and procedures for an SMS, which would include a Safety Management Policy, a process for Safety Risk Management, a process for Safety Assurance, and Safety Promotion; •Performance targets based on the safety performance measures set out in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan; •Compliance with FTA’s Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan and FTA’s Public Transportation Safety Program; and •A process and timeline for conducting an annual review and update of the plan. In addition, rail transit agencies would be required to include an emergency preparedness and response plan in their Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans. In light of the public interest in this rulemaking, and in an effort to provide guidance on the proposal and to solicit well-informed comments, FTA conducted numerous public outreach sessions and a webinar series related to the NPRM. Specifically, on February 12, 2016, FTA conducted public outreach for tribes and hosted a Tribal Technical Assistance Workshop wherein FTA presented its proposed rule and responded to technical questions from tribes. FTA subsequently delivered the same presentation during a webinar series open to all members of the public on February 24, March 1, March 2, and March 3. On March 7, FTA delivered the same presentation at an outreach session hosted by the National Rural Transit Assistance Program, which also was open to all members of the public. During each of these public outreach sessions and the public webinar series, FTA received and responded to numerous technical questions regarding the NPRM. FTA recorded the presentations, including the question and answer sessions, and made available the following documents on the public docket for this rulemaking (Docket FTA–2015–0021): (1) FTA’s PowerPoint Presentation from the public outreach sessions and public webinar series (https:// www.regulations.gov/document?D=FTA- 2015-0021-0012); (2) a written transcript of FTA’s public webinar of March 1, 2016 (https://www.regulations.gov/ document?D=FTA-2015-0021-0010); (3) a consolidated list of every Question and FTA Answer from the public outreach sessions and public webinar series (https://www.regulations.gov/ VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34423 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations document?D=FTA-2015-0021-0041); and (4) the results of polling questions from FTA’s public outreach sessions (https://www.regulations.gov/document ?D=FTA-2015-0021-0011). FTA also uploaded onto YouTube an audiovisual recording of its webinar from March 1, 2016. The video is available at the following link: https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBj5HRat wGA&feature=youtu.be. III. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Response to Relevant Comments As stated above, FTA issued an NPRM for Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans on February 5, 2016. 81 FR 6344 (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR- 2016-02-05/pdf/2016-02017.pdf). The public comment period for the NPRM subsequently closed on April 5, 2016. FTA received approximately 647 comments from approximately 77 entities, including States, transit agencies, trade associations, and individuals. FTA reviewed all of the comments and took them into consideration when developing today’s final rule. Some comments were outside the scope of this rulemaking and FTA did not respond to comments that were outside the scope. FTA received a number of comments related to the definitions of terms that are defined in other safety rulemakings. For example, FTA received comments on the terms, ‘‘Accident,’’ ‘‘Incident,’’ and ‘‘Occurrence,’’ which FTA defined in the NPRM to provide clarity regarding the types of safety ‘‘Events’’ that a transit agency should investigate, and these terms are defined in the State Safety Oversight (SSO) rulemaking. Given that the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan rule has a more inclusive universe of stakeholders than the SSO rule, FTA is including responses to the majority of the comments that it received related to these and other definitions included in other safety rules, but in this final rule, FTA does not respond to comments related to reporting thresholds and other requirements under the final SSO rule. On March 16, 2016, FTA issued a final rule for State Safety Oversight (see https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR- 2016-03-16/pdf/2016-05489.pdf for a discussion of comments received on these terms), and FTA has adopted definitions found in that rulemaking in this rulemaking, where appropriate. Similarly, FTA received several comments related to the definition of the term ‘‘State of Good Repair,’’ which FTA was required to define in a rulemaking for transit asset management pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5326. On July 26, 2016, FTA issued a final rule for Transit Asset Management wherein FTA defines the term ‘‘State of Good Repair,’’ and FTA has adopted that definition in this rulemaking. Please review the preamble of the Transit Asset Management final rule for FTA’s responses to the comments that it received related to the proposed definition of ‘‘State of Good Repair’’ (see https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ pkg/FR-2016-07-26/pdf/2016- 16883.pdf). Relatedly, a number of commenters noted inconsistencies with the definitions throughout FTA’s several safety rulemakings. In response, FTA has aligned the definitions in today’s rule with other safety rulemakings and the Transit Asset Management final rule to ensure consistency. Below, the NPRM comments and responses are subdivided by their corresponding sections of the proposed rule and subject matter. A. Scope and Applicability of Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans 1. Section 5310, Section 5311, Small Section 5307, and Tribal Operators Comments: Several commenters supported FTA’s proposal to require States to draft and certify safety plans on behalf of recipients and subrecipients of FTA financial assistance through the Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Program at Section 5310. Several commenters also supported FTA’s proposal only to apply this rule to Section 5310 recipients and subrecipients that provide service open to the public, and not to apply this rule to Section 5310 recipients and subrecipients that provide service closed to the public and only available for a particular clientele. Several commenters recommended that FTA exempt all Section 5310 recipients and subrecipients from this rule. These commenters asserted that many Section 5310 operators are not traditional transit agencies—they are human service organizations with a small transportation service, and they do not have sufficient staff, money, or resources to implement all aspects of a safety plan. One commenter stated that recipients and subrecipients of FTA financial assistance under Section 5310 and Section 5311 should not be considered operators of public transportation, and thus, they should not be subject to this rule. Several commenters also requested that tribal transit operators be excluded from the requirements of this rule. A few commenters asserted that the proposed delineation between ‘‘general public’’ and ‘‘closed door’’ is ambiguous. These commenters expressed concern that many smaller Section 5310 recipients may decide to discontinue transit service, thus reducing mobility for seniors and individuals with disabilities. One commenter stated that any new regulations should be tailored for small operators, and that FTA should avoid adding additional requirements and regulatory burdens. This commenter requested that FTA consider an exemption for transit agencies that operate fewer than 30 vehicles in peak revenue service. Another commenter suggested requiring a limited set of streamlined and simplified requirements, without identifying what those requirements might be. Response: FTA appreciates the comments that it received regarding the proposed applicability of this rule. Pursuant to the statutory requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d), ‘‘each recipient or State’’ is required to draft and certify a safety plan. The statute defines ‘‘recipient’’ to mean ‘‘a State or local governmental authority, or any other operator of a public transportation system, that receives financial assistance under [49 U.S.C. Chapter 53].’’ Notwithstanding this definition, and in light of the public comments and need for further evaluation, FTA is deferring regulatory action regarding the applicability of this rule to operators of public transportation systems that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds. Further evaluation of information and safety data related to these operators is needed to determine the appropriate level of regulatory burden necessary to address the safety risk presented by these operators. Consequently, the rule does not apply to an operator of a public transportation system that only receives Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5310, 49 U.S.C. 5311, or both 49 U.S.C. 5310 and 49 U.S.C. 5311. FTA disagrees with the suggestion to create a threshold of 30 vehicles in peak revenue service, and it is adopting the definition of ‘‘operator of a public transportation system’’ as ‘‘a provider of public transportation as defined under 49 U.S.C. 5302(14).’’ FTA agrees with the commenters who suggested that the final rule should be tailored for small operators and that the final rule should have simplified requirements. To that end, and as discussed in more detail below, FTA eliminated several significant requirements related to Safety Assurance for all small public transportation providers. Additionally, FTA eliminated requirements for Safety Assurance and a series of recordkeeping VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34424 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations requirements for all transit operators, regardless of size, in an effort to reduce their administrative, financial, and regulatory burdens. 2. Commuter Rail and Passenger Ferry Service Comments: Several commenters supported FTA’s proposal to exclude from this rule rail fixed guideway public transportation (commuter rail) service regulated by FRA. Several commenters requested FTA to clarify that the rule applies to rail transit systems not subject to regulation by FRA. Three commenters requested FTA to clarify what it means to exclude rail transit agencies subject to regulation by another Federal agency. One commenter urged FTA to ensure that the rule does not duplicate the efforts of State Safety Oversight Agencies (SSOAs) and overly burden transit agencies. One commenter suggested that FTA replace the term ‘‘commuter rail system’’ with the term ‘‘passenger rail system.’’ This commenter stated that the term ‘‘commuter’’ is not defined in the rule, leaving no context for determining what types of rail systems would be excluded. The commenter also asserted that rail transit agencies might provide passenger rail service that is subject to FRA regulations, but that service may not be considered ‘‘commuter’’ service, thus resulting in a too-narrow description of ‘‘commuter’’ and a contradiction to FTA’s intent to prevent ‘‘duplicative, inconsistent, or conflicting regulations.’’ Several commenters supported FTA’s proposal to exclude from this rule passenger ferry service regulated by USCG. Two commenters expressed support for the exclusion of USCG- inspected ferry vessels from the proposed rule. However, these commenters suggested that FTA should revise the term ‘‘passenger ferries’’ to clarify that the exclusion refers to passenger-only ferry vessels and ferry vessels that carry both passengers and vehicles (the commenters suggested the phrase ‘‘ferry as defined by title 46 United States Code 2101(10b)’’). Additionally, this commenter urged FTA to clarify that the exclusion of USCG-inspected vessels applies to subparts C and D of the proposed rule, in addition to subpart B. Response: FTA appreciates the support for its proposal to exclude passenger rail service regulated by FRA and passenger ferry service regulated by USCG from the requirements of this rule. As discussed throughout this document, this rule applies to each operator of a public transportation system, including rail fixed guideway public transportation passenger rail service that is not regulated by another Federal agency. To further clarify, to the extent that an operator of a public transportation system provides passenger rail service that is regulated by FRA and rail fixed guideway public transportation service that is not regulated by FRA, this rule only would apply to that portion of the rail fixed guideway public transportation service that is not regulated by FRA. FTA appreciates the concerns regarding the use of the term ‘‘commuter rail system,’’ which is not defined in this rule, and the suggestion to replace the term ‘‘commuter rail system’’ with the term ‘‘passenger rail system.’’ Instead, in an effort to use terms consistently throughout all of FTA’s rules and regulations, FTA is replacing the term ‘‘commuter rail system’’ with the term ‘‘rail fixed guideway public transportation’’ and is adopting the definition of this term as used in FTA’s new State Safety Oversight (SSO) rule at 49 CFR part 674. With respect to passenger ferry service, FTA clarifies that this rule would not apply to any passenger ferry service that is regulated by USCG, including passenger ferry service and ferry service that involves the transportation of both passengers and vehicles. The exclusion of ferry service regulated by USCG applies to the rule in its entirety. 3. Contracted Service Comments: Several commenters requested FTA to clarify how the rule would apply to transit agencies that contract for transit service. A commenter stated that the proposed elements of PTASPs are being implemented in the majority of transit systems operated by contractors, but contractors generally do not have direct relationships with transit agencies’ top leadership. A commenter requested that FTA clarify how contracted agencies should divide roles and responsibilities and implement SMS without having to revisit existing contractual agreements. This commenter also encouraged FTA to provide additional technical assistance to assist agencies operating in contract environments in the development and implementation of PTASPs. Another transit agency urged FTA to clarify the extent to which the implementation and administration of SMS principles could be delegated to contractors. One commenter stated that if inter-city bus service is contracted, then the contractor, not the transit agency, should have primary responsibility for safety and compliance with the rule. Two commenters asked FTA to clarify the rule’s application to paratransit service. One of these commenters requested clarification as to how the rule would apply to an instance where a contractor provides paratransit service for a Section 5311 recipient and a separate Section 5310 recipient. Response: As noted above, the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d) require each ‘‘State or local governmental authority, or any other operator of a public transportation system, that receives financial assistance under [49 U.S.C. Chapter 53]’’ to draft and certify a safety plan. Consequently, this rule applies to FTA’s recipients and subrecipients, unless the transit operator only receives Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds. To the extent that a recipient or subrecipient contracts for transit service, FTA will defer to the recipient or subrecipient to ensure that each of the requirements of this rule are being satisfied through the terms and conditions of its contract, including the identification of safety roles and responsibilities. Ultimately, under the statute, each FTA recipient or subrecipient has the responsibility to ensure compliance with this rule and to certify compliance annually—not a contractor. Similarly, paratransit service— whether general public or ADA complementary, and including contracted paratransit service—is subject to this rule, unless the transit operator only receives Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds. To the extent that a contractor provides paratransit service for multiple FTA recipients, each FTA recipient ultimately has responsibility for ensuring that its transit operation complies with this rule. B. Definitions 1. Accident Comment: Several commenters expressed concerns with the proposed definition of ‘‘Accident.’’ Many of these commenters expressed concern with the phrase ‘‘a report of a serious injury to a person’’ within the definition of Accident. One commenter stated that ‘‘serious injury’’ relies on information that a transit agency is unlikely to possess or be able to validate. Another commenter expressed that this phrase would significantly increase transit agencies’ notification and follow-up burdens. One commenter stated that the term ‘‘Accident’’ is a bias-laden term which suggests that an undesirable event could not be foreseen, prevented, or avoided. This commenter also asserted that the continued use of this VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34425 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations term diminishes advances made by safety and risk management professionals to adopt and promote bias- free language describing and categorizing incidents. Another commenter suggested that the proposed definition offers several categorizations for accidents without regard to cause, circumstance, or affected environment. Several commenters suggested alternatives for the proposed definition of ‘‘Accident.’’ A commenter recommended using the threshold for accident notification in the former SSO rule at 49 CFR 659.33: ‘‘[M]edical attention away from the scene for two or more individuals.’’ Another commenter proposed that the definition for ‘‘Accident’’ should include a threshold of at least $100,000, otherwise every minor collision would be reportable in accordance with 49 CFR part 674, creating a burden on rail transit agencies’ resources. This commenter suggested that accidents which result in property damage of $100,000 or less be classified as ‘‘incidents,’’ and be reportable to the SSOA and FTA, with a corresponding report to the National Transit Database (NTD) within thirty days. Another commenter remarked that the proposed definition of ‘‘Accident’’ should be more applicable to rail and bus/paratransit operations by using separate definitions for train and bus/ paratransit accidents. For bus/ paratransit, the commenter recommended that FTA should use the current Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) definition for ‘‘Accident’’ found in 49 CFR part 390. The commenter suggested that FTA could use an amended version of their proposed definition for ‘‘Accident’’ for rail operations that replaces ‘‘a report of serious injury to a person,’’ with ‘‘injuries requiring immediate medical attention away from the scene for two or more individuals.’’ Response: FTA included the definition of ‘‘Accident’’ in the proposed rule because the term appears in the definition of ‘‘Event’’ which is mentioned in the Safety Assurance section of the NPRM (a transit agency must develop a process to ‘‘[i]nvestigate safety events to identify causal factors’’). FTA defined ‘‘Event’’ as an ‘‘Accident, Incident, or Occurrence,’’ and to provide guidance to the industry on these terms, FTA defined them in its safety rules. Notably, FTA finalized a definition for ‘‘Accident’’ in its new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674, and FTA is adopting that definition in today’s rule to ensure consistency throughout FTA’s regulatory framework for safety. FTA did not propose any reporting or notification requirements in this rule. FTA established reporting and notification requirements in the new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674 and FTA’s NTD Reporting Manual. Today’s rule requires transit agencies to develop safety plans, and this rule outlines the requirements for those plans. Accordingly, FTA will not amend those notification and reporting requirements through today’s rule. FTA disagrees with the commenter who suggested that the phrase ‘‘serious injury’’ will increase transit agencies’ notification and follow-up burdens; this language should simplify, streamline, and make consistent any follow-up process. FTA also disagrees with the commenter who stated that the term ‘‘Accident’’ is a bias-laden term. Its use is intended to define the universe of safety Events that must be investigated. FTA disagrees with the suggestion that the proposed definition offers several categorizations for Accidents without regard to cause, circumstance, or affected environment. FTA has offered clarification on this term in Appendix A to the new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674 (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR- 2016-03-16/pdf/2016-05489.pdf). FTA acknowledges that a transit agency may have difficulty ascertaining a precise type of injury due to medical privacy laws. FTA does not expect transit agencies to violate any medical privacy laws to determine whether an injury is serious. FTA does not expect transit agencies to seek medical records of individuals involved in Accidents that may have resulted in serious injuries. FTA disagrees with the commenter who recommended using the threshold for accident notification in 49 CFR 659.33, ‘‘medical attention away from the scene for two or more individuals,’’ as FTA believes that a serious injury to a single person is of sufficient concern to warrant designation as an ‘‘Accident.’’ Additionally, ambulance transportation away from the scene may not necessarily be an accurate indicator of the actual gravity of the Event, given the possibility of ambulance operators transporting individuals with minor injuries. FTA disagrees with the commenter who suggested that the definition of ‘‘Accident’’ include a threshold of at least $100,000, and that Events which result in property damage of $100,000 or less be classified as ‘‘Incidents.’’ FTA did not utilize the original $25,000 threshold for ‘‘Accident’’ in the SSO rule because most collisions involving rail transit vehicles exceeds $25,000 in property or equipment damage and FTA believes that any threshold for property damage is arbitrary when determining whether an Event qualifies as an Accident. Removal of the $25,000 threshold also eliminates any need to separate rail transit property from non- rail transit property when making an assessment of damages. Finally, FTA disagrees with the commenter who suggested that the proposed definition of ‘‘Accident’’ be made more applicable to rail and bus/ paratransit by using separate definitions for train and bus/paratransit accidents. FTA intends to be consistent with its definitions, especially since this final rule applies to all operators of public transportation systems. 2. Incident Comments: One commenter stated that the proposed definition of ‘‘Incident’’ seems broad and undefined, asserting that under the proposed definition, any reported injury could be classified as an Incident. Another commenter asked how to distinguish between medical transport for serious and non-serious injuries. A commenter asked FTA to clarify what is considered ‘‘damage to facilities, equipment, rolling stock, or infrastructure’’ and how ‘‘damage’’ would be assessed to determine qualification for an Incident. Additionally, the commenter asked how a transit agency would differentiate damage and a simple mechanical issue, and whether every defect found on an inspection would now be considered ‘‘damage.’’ This commenter also remarked that the terms ‘‘personal injury’’ and ‘‘injury,’’ which are used in the definition for ‘‘Incident,’’ are not defined. A commenter suggested that the definition of ‘‘Accident’’ would be the better place to include one or more injuries requiring medical transport away from the scene. One commenter asked whether a transit agency must track Incidents. Another commenter stated that the Appendix to 49 CFR part 674 requires rail transit agencies to report Incidents to FTA using NTD within thirty days; the commenter asked whether transit agencies providing bus transportation also must report bus-related incidents to FTA using NTD. Response: FTA included the definition of ‘‘Incident’’ in the proposed rule because the term appears in the definition of ‘‘Event’’ which is mentioned in the Safety Assurance section of the NPRM (a transit agency must develop a process to ‘‘[i]investigate safety events to identify causal factors’’). FTA defined ‘‘Event’’ as an ‘‘Accident, Incident, or Occurrence,’’ and to provide guidance to the industry on these terms, FTA defined them in its safety rules. Notably, FTA finalized a VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34426 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations 2 See Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary (11th edition). definition for ‘‘Incident’’ in its new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674, and FTA is adopting that definition in today’s rule to ensure consistency throughout FTA’s regulatory framework for safety. FTA disagrees with the commenter who stated that the definition of ‘‘Incident’’ is broad and undefined and that any reported injury could be classified as an Incident. As discussed in more detail in response to the comments on the definition for ‘‘Serious Injury,’’ FTA believes that there is a clear delineation between ‘‘serious injury’’ and ‘‘non-serious injury.’’ FTA provided guidance in Appendix A to 49 CFR part 674 on how to define ‘‘damage to facilities, equipment, rolling stock, or infrastructure’’ and how ‘‘damage’’ would be assessed to determine qualification for an Incident. In Appendix A, ‘‘damage’’ that meets the Incident threshold is any non- collision-related damage to equipment, rolling stock, or infrastructure that disrupts the operations of a transit agency. Ultimately, each transit agency must assess the safety risk associated with any damage to its equipment facilities, equipment, rolling stock, or infrastructure, and whether it meets the definition of Accident, Incident, or Occurrence. FTA does not believe that it is necessary to define ‘‘injury’’ or ‘‘personal injury’’ in this rule, and it defines ‘‘Serious Injury’’ for purposes of establishing a threshold by which an Event would be considered an Accident instead of an Incident. In today’s rule, FTA has revised the definitions of ‘‘Accident’’ and ‘‘Incident’’ to make them consistent with FTA’s SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674. Under the updated definitions, one or more ‘‘serious injuries’’ is the threshold for Accident and one or more non-serious injuries requiring medical transport away from the scene is considered an Incident. Under FTA’s new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674, a rail transit agency must track and report an ‘‘Incident’’ through NTD, as has been the historical practice. Furthermore, a transit agency also must report Incident information for other modes to FTA through NTD. Please refer to the NTD Reporting Manual for further information on what information is collected on safety Events as a well as Accidents and Incidents, for both rail transit and bus agencies. 3. Occurrence Comments: One commenter asked how damage would be differentiated from mechanical issues or normal wear- and-tear. This commenter asked FTA to clarify the relationship between ‘‘Occurrence’’ and ‘‘Injury’’ given that neither ‘‘personal injury’’ nor ‘‘injury’’ are defined in the rule. Another commenter asked FTA to define ‘‘disrupt transit operations.’’ Finally, one commenter recommended omitting the proposed definition because it is too broad and does not serve a clear purpose. Response: FTA included the definition of ‘‘Occurrence’’ in the proposed rule because the term appears in the definition of ‘‘Event’’ which is mentioned in the Safety Assurance section of the NPRM (a transit agency must develop a process to ‘‘[i]investigate safety events to identify causal factors’’). FTA defined ‘‘Event’’ as an ‘‘Accident, Incident, or Occurrence,’’ and to provide guidance to the industry on these terms, FTA defined them in its safety rules. Notably, FTA finalized a definition for ‘‘Occurrence’’ in its new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674, and FTA is adopting that definition in today’s rule to ensure consistency throughout FTA’s regulatory framework for safety. FTA believes that there is a clear distinction between damage and mechanical issues or normal wear and tear. Damage is physical harm done to something or someone.2 Mechanical issues and normal wear and tear are not the result of something or someone inflicting harm on equipment, facilities, equipment, rolling stock, or infrastructure. A disruption to transit operations could be any interference with normal transit service at an agency. An Occurrence is a safety Event that only involves a disruption of transit service. A safety Event that results in a serious or non-serious injury would not be an Occurrence. FTA disagrees with the commenter who suggested that FTA should omit the proposed definition of ‘‘Occurrence’’ because it does not serve a clear purpose. The definition helps identify the universe of activity that a transit agency should investigate because it could present a safety risk. 4. Serious Injury Comments: Several commenters stated that transit agencies would not be able to obtain enough information about injuries to classify them as ‘‘serious,’’ given Federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) privacy regulations. These commenters suggested that HIPAA privacy regulations prevent transit agencies from obtaining personal medical information from individuals involved in accidents. One commenter remarked that, in their experience, hospital staff refused to provide personal medical information to a transit police officer. One commenter recommended that FTA should explain how transit agencies and SSOAs can comply with this definition, and this commenter suggested that FTA create the legal authority for States to do so, or develop an alternative approach. A commenter remarked that if FTA has authority to obtain this type of information, then FTA should do so on its own accord. The commenter asked if it would meet one of the exemptions from the Government in the Sunshine Act if FTA collects information. One commenter asked how FTA would address and reconcile the proposed definition with other applicable Federal policies and regulations. One commenter asked whether FTA would expect transit agencies, States, and SSOAs to obtain contact information for every individual involved in an accident, and then monitor local hospitals or contact these individuals in the seven-day period to determine if anyone involved in the accident had to be hospitalized for more than 48 hours as a result of this accident. Finally, one commenter asked whether a doctor would be required to respond to every transit event that has the possibility of being classified as an accident to triage the situation and determine whether the event meets the definition of an accident. Several commenters expressed concern about the definition of ‘‘Serious Injury’’ and its associated burden on transit agency staff. A commenter concluded that the proposed definition would require transit agencies, States, and SSOAs to step outside their training to practice some form of medicine—for which they are not licensed—to comply with the proposed rule, unless transit agencies, States, and SSOAs are expected to hire trained medical personnel as a part of their programs. The commenter stated that transit agency staff may not be aware of the nature or extent of an individual’s injury, and these staff may only know that an individual was transported away from the scene for medical attention with very limited ability (and no authority) to confirm the individual’s injury status. A commenter stated that, in order to meet a similar FRA requirement, the commenter expends considerable resources following up on individual claims, and is sometimes unable to properly classify events for months or years after the event date. The commenter concluded that the resources needed to gather this VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34427 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations proposed information would be burdensome, as the volume of passengers is much greater for FTA. A commenter asserted that transit agency staff could report certain findings on their initial incident reports, but this effort would be burdensome, and the transit agency staff would have to rely on eyewitness reports rather than medical professionals’ opinions, rendering the effort unreliable. The commenter asked whether an initial patient/scene assessment would suffice, or whether a definitive medical diagnosis would be required. Several commenters suggested alternatives to the proposed definition of ‘‘Serious Injury.’’ Two commenters recommended that FTA use the definition in the former SSO rule at 49 CFR 659.33, which states that an accident involves injuries if there is a need for ‘‘immediate medical attention away from the scene for two or more individuals.’’ According to these commenters, verifying transport away from the scene would have several benefits, such as: Not requiring transit agencies, States, and SSOAs to practice medicine to classify events; avoiding HIPAA complications; allowing events classified as accidents and incidents to be reported and investigated in a timely manner; being a more reasonable threshold for injury definitions; requiring only easily attainable information; and its alignment with NTD reporting requirements. One commenter questioned how FTA determined the classification for ‘‘serious’’ and questioned how serious an injury could be if no medical treatment was sought for seven days. The commenter stated that FTA needs to define ‘‘serious’’ and remove the subjectivity of whether or not an injury is serious. Two commenters asked for the value of defining ‘‘Serious Injury’’ (that is, why does FTA want to collect this information and how would it enhance overall safety). One commenter recommended that FTA remove this definition from all of its safety rules. Response: Through the Safety Assurance section of today’s rule (49 CFR 673.27), FTA requires each operator of a public transportation system to develop a process for conducting investigations of safety events to identify causal factors. FTA defines the word ‘‘Event,’’ to mean an ‘‘Accident, Incident, or Occurrence,’’ and FTA defines ‘‘Accident’’ to mean, among other things, ‘‘a report of a serious injury to a person.’’ To provide guidance to the industry on this term, FTA defined ‘‘Serious Injury’’ in its safety rules, including its new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674. FTA is adopting the definition of ‘‘Serious Injury’’ from the new SSO rule to ensure consistency throughout FTA’s regulatory framework for safety. FTA has addressed comments regarding its proposed definition of ‘‘Serious Injury’’ in the final SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674 (https://www.gpo.gov/ fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-03-16/pdf/2016- 05489.pdf) and in its responses to the definition of ‘‘Accident,’’ above. FTA acknowledges that a transit agency may have difficulty ascertaining a precise type of injury due to medical privacy laws, such as HIPPA. FTA does not expect transit agencies to violate these laws in order to obtain the information needed to determine whether an injury is serious, and it does not expect transit agencies to request the medical records of individuals involved in safety Events that may be classified as Accidents resulting in Serious Injuries. Nor does FTA expect transit agency staff to undergo medical training in order to determine whether an injury meets the threshold of ‘‘serious.’’ Instead, FTA expects safety personnel to exercise a common sense approach when evaluating injuries. As several commenters noted, some injuries may be readily known or observable at the scene of an event, in which case, a transit agency may make a determination as to whether an injury is serious. Other injuries may not be apparent until the individual undergoes a medical examination, in which case the injury would be deemed ‘‘serious’’ only if a transit agency becomes aware that the injury meets the threshold for seriousness. FTA believes that a transit agency may utilize these approaches when determining the seriousness of an injury, and it does not believe that it needs to reconcile the definition of ‘‘Serious Injury’’ with other laws. Given the ability of transit agencies to make observations at the scenes of safety events and to evaluate data and information collected at these scenes, FTA does not believe that any burdens of this rule are unreasonable. FTA does not expect transit agencies to monitor local hospitals or contact individuals involved in safety events within the seven day period to determine if the individuals were hospitalized for more than 48 hours. FTA is not requiring doctors to respond to every safety Event that has the possibility of being classified as an Accident to triage the situation and determine whether the event meets the definition of an Accident, and FTA is not requiring transit agencies to hire medical personnel. In today’s rule, FTA is requiring transit agencies to develop a process for conducting safety investigations. 5. Accountable Executive Comments: FTA received numerous comments regarding its proposed definition of ‘‘Accountable Executive.’’ Several commenters provided input on the definition of ‘‘Accountable Executive’’ as it relates to ‘‘Chief Safety Officer.’’ One commenter stated that, according to the proposed rule, the Accountable Executive is responsible for implementing and maintaining the SMS; however, this should be a primary responsibility of the Chief Safety Officer. Another commenter asked whether an Accountable Executive would experience a conflict of interest if he or she also serves as the Chief Safety Officer or SMS Executive, as allowed under proposed 49 CFR 673.23(d)(2), because the duties also involve operational, financial, and other responsibilities that may be in conflict with safety responsibilities. Several commenters recommended that FTA clarify in the final rule that State officials are not ‘‘Accountable Executives’’ unless the State is a transit operator, and if so, only with respect to the State’s activities as a transit operator. Several commenters asked whether the Accountable Executive is the chief elected official, such as a county executive or mayor, in cases where the transit operator is a county or city government. A transit agency, with a general manager who is responsible for the day-to-day aspects of the transit system and a chief administrator who is responsible for the administrative aspects of the organization, asked how it would designate a single Accountable Executive who meets all of the criteria of 49 CFR part 673. A few commenters expressed concerns about the overlapping and burdensome responsibilities of the Accountable Executive, which may not allow for sufficient attention to safety. Several commenters said the proposed definition may give an elected official or board chair the designation of an Accountable Executive despite serving at a policy, rather than an operational, level. A transit agency argued that the proposed definition is ambiguous and inconsistent with the proposed National Public Transportation Safety Plan, and some definitions state that the Accountable Executive is in charge of an asset management plan, while other areas omit this requirement. One commenter asserted that the job duties of planning staff are inherently much different from maintenance staff activities, and staff should report to their respective managers instead of a VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34428 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations single executive. Similarly, a commenter stated that, in some instances, a transit agency’s reporting structure is shaped by State or local laws to promote a separation of duties and financial checks and balances, and these important governmental tenets should not be disrupted by the new safety requirements. Several commenters suggested that the definition of Accountable Executive may not be applicable in some non- traditional transit agency hierarchies. Several commenters suggested that the Accountable Executive should be a general manager, president, or equivalent officer who is responsible for safety, asset management, and human resources, but not have full control over the budgeting process. Another commenter stated that that proposed definition may be inappropriate because having one Accountable Executive for SMS, the asset management plan, and the safety plan is ineffective because the Accountable Executive should be represented by different individuals for each regulatory program. The commenter recommended that FTA define an Accountable Executive to be ‘‘an individual who is responsible for the Safety Management System and Agency Safety Plan, who shall be required to have a role in the [transit asset management plan] and investment prioritization for the respective agency.’’ Response: Each transit operator must identify an Accountable Executive within its organization who ultimately is responsible for carrying out and implementing its safety plan and asset management plan. And to be clear, a State that drafts a plan on behalf of another recipient or subrecipient is not the Accountable Executive for those transit operators. An Accountable Executive should be a transit operator’s chief executive; this person is often the president, chief executive officer, or general manager. FTA understands that at many smaller transit operators, roles and responsibilities are more fluid. However, FTA believes that, even in circumstances where responsibilities are either shared or delegated, there must be one primary decision-maker who is ultimately responsible for both safety and transit asset management. It is a basic management tenet that accountabilities flow top-down. Therefore, as a management system, safety and transit asset management require that accountability reside with an operator’s top executive. FTA received numerous comments on its proposed definition of ‘‘Accountable Executive’’ in its rulemaking on transit asset management, and FTA directs readers to the final Transit Asset Management rule at 49 CFR part 625 for further information (https:// www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-07-26/ pdf/2016-16883.pdf). 6. Chief Safety Officer Comments: One commenter agreed with FTA that a Chief Safety Officer should not serve in other service, operational, or maintenance capacities. Several commenters agreed with FTA’s proposal to allow Section 5310, Section 5311, and small public transportation providers to designate as the Chief Safety Officer a person who also undertakes other functions. Several commenters asked FTA to clarify the term ‘‘adequately trained.’’ One commenter expressed concern that FTA may be assuming that any rail transit agency is large enough to merit its own Chief Safety Officer with no additional operational or maintenance responsibilities, indicating that this requirement is burdensome because a rail transit agency would have to hire or contract a separate Chief Safety Officer for a limited role. The commenter suggested that FTA should permit an exemption for small rail transit agencies similar to the exemption for small public transportation providers to resolve this concern. This commenter also asked FTA to clarify whether a Chief Safety Officer has to be in the direct employ of a rail transit agency and whether he or she could be a part- time employee. A commenter stated that FTA has proposed, but not promulgated, training rules for SSOA managers, Federal employees, and transit agency staff who are responsible for safety oversight, and argued that these training requirements also should apply to a Chief Safety Officer prior to designation by the Accountable Executive. One commenter stated that the terms ‘‘Chief Safety Officer’’ and ‘‘Safety Officer’’ are inconsistently used, and the term ‘‘Safety Officer’’ was not defined in the NPRM. To rectify this inconsistency, the commenter, who concluded that it is implied that the Safety Officer is the Chief Safety Officer, suggested that FTA should replace the term ‘‘Safety Officer’’ with ‘‘Chief Safety Officer.’’ Response: FTA appreciates the support from commenters regarding its proposed definition of ‘‘Chief Safety Officer.’’ Given the different sizes of transit operators, and given the varying operating environments of transit systems across the nation, FTA is deferring to each transit operator to determine the level of training that is adequate for their Chief Safety Officer. FTA disagrees with the commenter who suggested that a Chief Safety Officer at a rail transit agency should be able to have multiple roles within the organization. Given the more complex operating environments of rail transit systems and the increased safety risks in these environments, FTA will not allow the Chief Safety Officers for rail transit agencies to have additional operational and maintenance responsibilities; it is necessary to have a single individual wholly dedicated to ensuring safety. FTA believes that this role should be a full-time responsibility at rail transit agencies, unless a rail transit agency petitions FTA to allow its Chief Safety Officer to serve multiple roles given administrative and financial hardships with having a single, dedicated, and full-time Chief Safety Officer. Finally, FTA notes that all references to the term ‘‘Safety Officer’’ in the NPRM were intended to mean the term ‘‘Chief Safety Officer.’’ 7. Operator of Public Transportation System Comments: One commenter suggested that an ‘‘Operator of a Public Transportation System’’ should be ‘‘any organization, agency, or company that operates, or contracts someone to operate, any mode of transportation that is used by the general public in a defined city, State, or region.’’ Response: The proposed rule defines ‘‘Operator of a Public Transportation System’’ as ‘‘a provider of public transportation as defined under 49 U.S.C. 5302(14), and which does not provide service that is closed to the general public and only available for a particular clientele.’’ Given that FTA is deferring action regarding the applicability of this rule to Section 5310 recipients, FTA has changed this definition in the final rule to be ‘‘a provider of public transportation as defined under 49 U.S.C. 5302(14).’’ The additional language—‘‘and which does not provide service that is closed to the general public and only available for a particular clientele’’—is not needed since the rule is not applicable to Section 5310 recipients at this time. FTA believes that the proposed definition is sufficiently broad to encompass the categories of transit providers referenced in the commenter’s definition. FTA does not agree that the definition needs to specify that an operator provide service in a defined city, State, or region. 8. Rail Transit Agency Comments: The proposed rule defines a ‘‘Rail Transit Agency’’ as ‘‘any entity that provides services on a rail fixed VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34429 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations guideway public transportation system.’’ One commenter asked FTA to clarify whether the proposed definition applies equally to a public transit operator and a contracted private firm that operates and maintains services on a rail fixed guideway public transportation system. Response: This rule applies to any operator of a public transportation system that receives Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53, including rail transit operators that receive FTA funds and are not regulated by FRA, unless the operator only receives Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds. The application of this rule extends to contracted private firms that operate public transportation and receive FTA funds, but it does not extend to private contractors that provide service that is not public transportation. 9. Performance Target, Safety Performance Target, and Performance Criteria Comments: One commenter remarked that the proposed definition for ‘‘Performance Target’’ needs clarity. Another commenter stated that FTA should consider deleting the proposed definition for ‘‘Performance Target,’’ because the proposed definition for ‘‘Safety Performance Target’’ is more appropriate for this safety-related rule. This commenter also suggested revising the definition of ‘‘Safety Performance Target’’ to ‘‘a specific level of measurable performance for a given safety performance criteria over a specified timeframe.’’ FTA proposed to define ‘‘Performance Criteria’’ as ‘‘categories of measures indicating the level of safe performance within a transit agency.’’ One commenter stated that this definition is confusing and possibly inconsistent with the proposed National Public Transportation Safety Plan. The commenter stated that the terms ‘‘Criteria’’ and ‘‘Measures’’ appear to be synonymous, and proposed the following definition for ‘‘Performance Criteria’’: ‘‘Categories of safety performance measures that focus on the reduction of safety events, both for the public who use or interface with the rail system, and employees who operate and maintain the system.’’ Response: As appropriate, FTA has incorporated into this rule definitions that appear in other rulemakings undertaken pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5329 and 5326, as well as the final joint FHWA/FTA Planning Rule which was published May 27, 2016 (see https:// www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-05-27/ pdf/2016-11964.pdf). Accordingly, FTA has revised the definition of ‘‘Performance Target’’ and added the definition of ‘‘Performance Measure’’ to match the definitions used in the joint FHWA/FTA Planning rule and FTA’s Transit Asset Management rule. To avoid redundancy, FTA is deleting the definition for ‘‘Safety Performance Target’’ and keeping the definition of ‘‘Performance Target,’’ since these terms are one and the same for purposes of this rule. FTA had to reconcile the use of similar terms throughout its statutory authorizations for safety and asset management, including the terms ‘‘criteria’’ and ‘‘measures.’’ Although Congress used two different terms throughout 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53, it intended these terms to be synonymous. In the NPRM, FTA proposed to define ‘‘Performance Criteria’’ to mean ‘‘categories of measures indicating the level of safe performance within a transit agency,’’ but to eliminate confusion in this final rule, FTA removes that term, replaces it with the term ‘‘Performance Measure,’’ and incorporates the definition of ‘‘Performance Measure’’ as used in FTA’s Transit Asset Management rule. Consequently, FTA uses the term ‘‘Performance Measure,’’ in the place of ‘‘Performance Criteria,’’ throughout this final rule. 10. Small Public Transportation Provider Comments: The proposed rule defines ‘‘Small Public Transportation Provider’’ as ‘‘a recipient or subrecipient of Urbanized Area Formula Program funds under 49 U.S.C. 5307 that has one hundred (100) or fewer vehicles in revenue service and does not operate a rail fixed guideway public transportation system.’’ Several commenters requested FTA to clarify that the ‘‘100 buses in revenue service standard’’ applies only to recipients of Section 5307 funds, and not recipients of Section 5310 or 5311 funds. One commenter asked whether the threshold of 100 vehicles in revenue service refers to total revenue fleet vehicles, peak vehicles, or something else. Another commenter that operates commuter rail service regulated by FRA, but has fewer than 100 buses in revenue service, asserted that they met the definition of a ‘‘Small Public Transportation Provider.’’ The commenter stated it posed this assertion to FTA during a webinar for this rulemaking on March 2, 2016, and it requested that FTA clarification the application of the rule to its scenario. A couple of commenters remarked that the proposed definition for ‘‘Small Public Transportation Provider’’ differed between related rulemakings and notices, specifically the TAM proposed rule and FTA’s Circular 9030.1E. Commenters noted that the TAM rule’s reference to ‘‘in revenue service’’ is a typical definition in the industry and should be adhered to across all proposed rulemakings. Other commenters suggested that the definition include providers with ‘‘100 or fewer fixed-route vehicles,’’ or be based on the service area’s population rather than the number of buses. Additionally, one commenter suggested that vanpool fleets that are not open to the general public should be counted as revenue service vehicles. Several commenters noted that significant differences exist between rail transit operators, large bus operators, and smaller operators, particularly in the ways in which they conduct business and in the rate of accidents and the consequences of those accidents. One commenter stated that the categories in the proposed rule are too broad and rigid and could have unintended consequences for small operators. The commenter remarked that the rigidity of a ‘‘two-tier system’’ could cause a Section 5307 recipient, with under 100 vehicles, to have their oversight provided by the State. Another commenter stated that the two-tier system does not take into account a Section 5311 recipient that may serve multiple counties with over 100 vehicles. The commenter remarked that there is no definition for this type of system within the ‘‘tiers’’ and that the Section 5311 recipient might be bumped into a higher category. One commenter suggested adding a third tier for systems operating fifty or fewer vehicles and no rail fixed guideway public transportation service to provide States with the opportunity to implement SMS scalable to the size and complexity of the transit organization. Response: FTA appreciates the comments that it received regarding its proposed definition for ‘‘Small Public Transportation Provider.’’ FTA agrees with the commenters who suggested that FTA align this definition with the definition in the final TAM rule, and FTA agrees with the commenters who suggested that FTA create the threshold for Small Public Transportation Providers based on vehicles utilized in peak revenue service, as opposed to revenue service in general, as peak revenue service is a threshold commonly used in the transit industry. Therefore, in today’s final rule, FTA defines ‘‘Small Public Transportation Provider’’ to mean ‘‘a recipient or subrecipient of Federal financial VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34430 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5307 that has one hundred (100) or fewer vehicles in peak revenue service and does not operate a rail fixed guideway public transportation system.’’ 11. Requests for New Definitions Comments: One commenter requested that FTA add new definitions for the term ‘‘safety performance assessment.’’ One commenter recommended that FTA clarify whether the term ‘‘Public Transportation Vehicle’’ includes rail, bus, paratransit, maintenance, and non- revenue vehicles. Several commenters recommended that FTA define the term ‘‘Transit Provider’’ as follows: ‘‘A State is not considered to be a transit provider by virtue of passing on funds to subrecipients under 49 U.S.C. 5310, 5311, or 5339, administering these programs, developing and implementing a TAM plan, or safety plan or certifying a safety plan, or taking any other steps required of a State by Chapter 53 of title 49, United States Code or other Federal statue, or by this or other FTA rules.’’ Response: For purposes of implementing this rule, FTA does not find it necessary to further define the term ‘‘safety performance assessment.’’ Generally, this term refers to a transit agency’s evaluation of its success of managing safety risks. To the extent there is any confusion over this term, FTA will provide technical assistance. FTA notes that a public transportation vehicle may include rail, bus, paratransit, maintenance, and non- revenue vehicles, as the term is utilized in the definition of ‘‘Accident.’’ Finally, FTA did not propose to define the term ‘‘Transit Provider’’ in the NPRM, and FTA believes that the term is sufficiently descriptive and does not need to be defined in this rule. C. General Requirements Comments: Several commenters provided high-level feedback regarding the general requirements for PTASPs as proposed in 49 CFR 673.11. One commenter suggested that FTA should clearly emphasize that these elements are minimum requirements and that a transit agency should be able to enhance its SMS and incorporate tools and best practices that are proven to be effective, particularly given the adaptability, scalability, and flexibility of SMS. One commenter asserted that the combination of the general requirements for each written safety plan, along with the requirements to ‘‘establish SMS processes,’’ results in a lack of clarity regarding the required contents of the actual document that a transit agency would consider to be its safety plan. This commenter stated that FTA should provide at least the same degree of specificity with regard to the required contents of a transit agency’s written safety plan that FTA provided for SSPPs under the former SSO rule at 49 CFR part 659. Response: As discussed throughout today’s final rule, SMS is scalable and flexible, and it can be adapted to any transit agency’s unique operating environment. The requirements in the rule provide the skeleton framework for safety plans, and FTA encourages transit agencies to incorporate tools and best practices that effectively mitigate and eliminate safety risks throughout their systems. To be clear, each written safety plan must include the documented processes and procedures related to SMS, and the written plan must include each of the other requirements as outlined in the rule. FTA intentionally drafted broad, non-prescriptive requirements for SMS in an effort to develop a safety framework that could fit within the thousands of unique transit operating environments across the nation. 1. Role of the Accountable Executive Comments: Pursuant to FTA’s proposed provisions at 49 CFR 673.11(a)(1), each transit agency’s Accountable Executive must sign the agency’s safety plan and subsequent updates thereto. One commenter supported this provision and asserted that the requirement is essential for SMS and for maintaining a positive safety culture. Another commenter agreed that the Accountable Executive with budgetary authority should review and approve the safety plan. A couple of commenters asked whether the Accountable Executive must be the same individual for purposes of approving the agency’s safety plan and the agency’s transit asset management plan, and they asked whether the Accountable Executive must be the individual explicitly ‘‘responsible for implementing SMS.’’ These commenters also inquired about the Accountable Executive’s role for municipal government agencies, and they asked whether the head of a city’s department of transportation, the head of a city’s department of public works, or a city manager may serve as the Accountable Executive for a municipal government agency, as opposed to a city’s mayor. Response: As a preliminary matter, FTA distinguishes the role of the Accountable Executive from the role of a Board of Directors, or an Equivalent Authority. Pursuant to 49 CFR 673.11(a)(1), the Accountable Executive must sign the safety plan; the Board of Directors or an Equivalent Authority must approve the safety plan in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(A). Given the varying sizes and natures of transit systems, FTA defers to those systems in their designation of an Accountable Executive, so long as that single individual has the ultimate responsibility and accountability for the implementation and maintenance of the SMS of a public transportation agency; responsibility for carrying out the agency’s transit asset management plan; and control or direction over the human and capital resources needed to develop and maintain both the agency’s public transportation agency safety plan and the agency’s transit asset management plan. For municipal government agencies, that individual could be a county executive or a mayor, or it could be the head of a city’s department of transportation, the head of a city’s department of public works, or a city manager. FTA has offered this non- exhaustive list of examples of Accountable Executives for illustrative purposes only. And while many individuals within a transit agency may be responsible for ‘‘implementing’’ SMS, the Accountable Executive is the individual with the ultimately responsibility for SMS implementation at the agency. 2. Approval of a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan Comments: Pursuant to FTA’s proposed provisions at 49 CFR 673.11(a)(1), each transit agency would be required to have its safety plan, and subsequent updates thereto, approved by the agency’s Board of Directors, or an Equivalent Authority. One commenter supported this provision, indicating that this activity is essential for SMS and for maintaining a positive safety culture. Several commenters asserted that the agency’s Accountable Executive, not the Board of Directors, would be the more appropriate entity to approve the safety plan. These commenters stated that a Board of Directors, which can consist of limited-term elected officials, are not subject to the same training requirements as the Accountable Executive, and do not have the operational knowledge and expertise suitable for the review and approval of a safety plan. One of these commenters suggested that the Accountable Executive have top-level ownership of the safety plan, with a stipulated responsibility to educate and report to the Board of Directors on the agency’s safety program. Several commenters asked questions about the implementation of this VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34431 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations provision for agencies that lack Boards of Directors. A couple of commenters asked if transit agencies can request FTA to approve their ‘‘Equivalent Authorities,’’ or whether they must wait for an FTA oversight review to determine whether their Equivalent Authorities are consistent with the rule. A couple of commenters had specific questions regarding the adequacy of an Equivalent Authority. One example involved a streetcar being owned by a city, but being operated and maintained by a non-profit organization with its own Board of Directors. Another example involved a State Department of Transportation which does not have a Board of Directors, but instead, has an Administrator/CEO. One commenter asked FTA to provide a clear example of an ‘‘Equivalent Authority’’ if a recipient does not have a Board of Directors. Similarly, another commenter asserted that a State may have difficulty identifying an Equivalent Authority because a subrecipient may be a parish or county that does not necessarily have a Board of Directors. Another commenter recommended that an Equivalent Authority should have a thorough knowledge of a transit agency’s daily operations and the authority to obtain operational and safety data so that it could provide safety oversight. One commenter asked about the measure of ‘‘approval’’ for the Board of Directors, and inquired as to what that approval would denote in terms of safety responsibility. Another commenter observed that a transit agency with rail and bus operations must have its safety plan approved by the SSOA for purposes of its rail operations, and suggested that FTA would have to approve the safety plan for purposes of its bus operations. This commenter expressed concern that, unless there are very clear guidelines for the review and approval of the safety plans, there is the potential for conflicting views and approvals, including approval of one operation and not the other. Response: FTA appreciates concerns from commenters indicating that members of a transit agency’s Board of Directors may not be fully educated in safety; however, through the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(A), Congress required each transit agency’s Board of Directors, or an Equivalent Authority, to approve the agency’s safety plan. Through the Safety Management Policy provisions of 49 CFR 673.23 and the Safety Promotion provisions of 49 CFR 673.29, each transit agency is required to identify individuals who are responsible for safety in their organization and to ensure that those individuals are adequately trained, including staff and executive leadership, and this requirement should extend to a transit agency’s Board of Directors. If a transit agency does not have a Board of Directors, then an Equivalent Authority may approve its safety plan. An Equivalent Authority is an entity that carries out duties similar to that of a Board of Directors, including sufficient authority to review and approve a safety plan. For example, an Equivalent Authority could be the policy decision-maker/grant manager for a small public transportation provider; the city council and/or city manager for a city; a county legislature for a county; or a State transportation commission for a State. Given the varying sizes and organizational structures of the thousands of recipients and subrecipients throughout the country, FTA is not providing a prescriptive definition of this term, and it is deferring to each transit agency to identify who would be an Equivalent Authority for its system. FTA intends its list of examples to be non-exhaustive and illustrative only. The approval of the safety plan should mean that the Board of Directors or the Equivalent Authority accepts the safety plan as satisfactory, that the safety plan complies with each of the requirements of this rule, and that the safety plan effectively will guide the transit operator with the management of safety risks. Finally, to clarify, FTA does not intend to collect and ‘‘approve’’ safety plans. FTA intends to ensure that transit agencies comply with this rule by reviewing their safety plans through FTA’s existing Triennial Reviews and State Management Reviews. Through these oversight processes, FTA may collect various documents, including safety plans, to ensure compliance with this part, but FTA will not provide regular ‘‘approvals’’ of the plans. SSOAs, however, must approve the safety plans of rail fixed guideway public transportation operations within their jurisdictions. 3. Documentation of SMS Processes and Activities Comments: Pursuant to FTA’s proposed provisions at 49 CFR 673.11(a)(2), each transit agency would be required to document its processes and activities related to SMS in its safety plan. One commenter sought clarity regarding whether the safety plan must detail the processes and activities, or just indicate that such processes and activities exist. Another commenter asked which documents should be included in the safety plan, specifically whether the safety plan should include documents that are generated by the results of ongoing SMS activities, or only those documents which formally present a description of SMS processes. Response: Each safety plan must include documented SMS processes; it is not sufficient to merely indicate in the safety plan that SMS processes exist. Through the practice and implementation of SMS, each transit agency may generate data and other documentation, but the safety plan itself must document each of the processes as outlined in this rule. FTA is providing discretion to each transit agency to decide for itself whether it will incorporate processes and documented activities beyond those required in today’s final rule. 4. Safety Performance Targets Comments: Pursuant to FTA’s proposed provisions at 49 CFR 673.11(a)(3), each transit agency would be required to identify in its safety plan performance targets based on the safety performance measures that FTA establishes in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. One commenter supported FTA’s proposed list of safety performance measures as outlined in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan, but several commenters recommended that FTA expand the list of performance measures. One commenter recommended that FTA reduce its proposed list of safety performance measures to align with the safety outcomes that transit agencies currently report to NTD. One commenter stated that the proposed definition of ‘‘Performance Criteria’’ is confusing and inconsistent with the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. The commenter stated that the terms ‘‘Criteria’’ and ‘‘Measures’’ are synonymous, and proposed the following alternate definition: ‘‘categories of safety performance measures that focus on the reduction of safety events, both for the public who use or interface with the rail system, and employees who operate and maintain the system.’’ Several commenters requested that FTA provide agencies with additional guidance on the four basic safety performance measures. One commenter asked whether the safety plan must contain specific quantitative performance targets for all performance measures. This commenter stated that specific quantitative targets would pose challenges for transit agencies and that all targets should be VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34432 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations broad and not static to allow agencies to adjust their targets as new information dictates. Several commenters requested FTA to allow transit agencies to update and revise their safety plans if FTA alters or adjusts performance measures. Response: FTA appreciates the comments that it received regarding its proposed safety performance measures; however, the proper vehicle for addressing these comments is through the notice and comment process tied to FTA’s proposed National Public Transportation Safety Plan (RIN 2132– ZA04). The National Public Transportation Safety Plan will identify FTA’s safety performance measures, not today’s rule for Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans. The Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan rule only requires transit agencies to set performance targets based on the performance measures established in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. FTA will address all of the comments related to safety performance measures in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan, including the above-referenced comments that were directed to this rulemaking. FTA notes that in the NPRM for this rule, FTA used the term ‘‘Performance Criteria,’’ which it proposed to define as ‘‘categories of measures indicating the level of safe performance within a transit agency.’’ FTA used this term because the language of 49 U.S.C. 5329 uses the term ‘‘Performance Criteria.’’ Other parts of FTA’s authorizing statute, such as the Transit Asset Management provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5326, use the term ‘‘Performance Measures.’’ FTA believes that Congress intended the terms ‘‘Performance Criteria’’ and ‘‘Performance Measures’’ to be synonymous. To eliminate confusion over distinctions between these terms and to ensure consistency with the use of these terms throughout FTA’s programs, FTA has removed the term ‘‘Performance Criteria’’ from today’s final rule and replaced it with the term ‘‘Performance Measure.’’ Finally, in accordance with the statutory requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(E), each transit agency must include in its safety plan, ‘‘performance targets based on the safety performance criteria and state of good repair standards.’’ These targets must be specific numerical targets set by transit agencies themselves. FTA emphasizes, however, that the safety plan is intended to be a living document that evolves over time. FTA expects transit agencies to modify their safety plans, and to adjust their performance targets, as they collect data and implement SMS. Indeed, the performance targets may change from year to year, or more frequently, as safety data may necessitate. 5. Future Requirements in FTA’s Public Transportation Safety Program and National Public Transportation Safety Plan Comments: One commenter requested FTA to provide guidance on what it means to ‘‘address’’ the requirements and standards in its Public Transportation Safety Program and National Public Transportation Safety Plan. Another commenter expressed concern that FTA has not established formal standards for these requirements, and requested FTA to establish minimum measures and targets for safety performance and improvement. Response: In today’s final rule, FTA is requiring each transit agency to address—more specifically, to ensure that it is complying with—all applicable requirements and standards as set forth in FTA’s Public Transportation Safety Program at 49 CFR part 671 and the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. In particular, each transit agency must identify safety performance targets based on the performance measures that FTA establishes in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. Additionally, FTA encourages transit agencies to adopt any voluntary minimum safety performance standards established in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan, until mandatory standards are established, in which case each transit agency must fully comply with those safety performance standards. To the extent that FTA amends its Public Transportation Safety Program Rule or the National Public Transportation Safety Plan in the future, FTA expects each transit agency to amend its safety plan, as appropriate. 6. Process and Timeline for Annual Review and Update Comments: One commenter asked FTA to clarify if the timeline for the annual review process is determined by each transit agency, or whether there is a particular date by which an annual review and update is required. Several commenters disagreed with the proposed requirement that the plans be updated annually. Some commenters suggested that safety plans only need to be updated every two years because the requirement for an annual update of safety plans is excessive and burdensome. Several of these commenters asserted that if annual action is needed, an annual review and status report would be less resource intensive. A few commenters suggested that safety plans need only to be updated every two years, unless there is a significant policy or change in condition (such as a fatality) that warrants a change. Another commenter recommended the same approach, but with updates required every three years rather than two years. One commenter suggested alternative review schedules ranging from every two years to every five years. One commenter suggested that organizations which meet various criteria should be placed on a five year review plan and they should be required to submit any requested updates to policies for review and approval. One commenter asserted the review requirement should be consistent with FTA’s proposed rule for Transit Asset Management Plans, which would require each transit agency to update its Transit Asset Management Plan at least once every four years. Additionally, this commenter suggested that the rule should require an update of a safety plan in any year when risk assessments result in the need for substantial mitigation, or if there are significant changes to asset inventory, condition assessments, or investment prioritization. A couple of commenters asked about the required annual update as it may relate to a rail transit agency’s SSPP annual reviews. A commenter asked whether the process for conducting annual reviews would likely be similar to the SSPP annual reviews, including requirements that an Accountable Executive would perform the review and that a transit agency document all updates and revisions. A commenter suggested that the proposed requirement to conduct an annual review and update the safety plan, as needed, differed from the requirement to conduct a formal annual internal audit of the SSPP. A commenter expressed concern with FTA’s decision to publish the National Public Transportation Safety Plan with no schedule for revision, which would cause transit agencies to continuously update their safety plans to coincide with any changes in FTA guidance documents. This commenter further encouraged FTA to define prescriptive elements of the annual review and update process to better guide agencies. Response: Pursuant to the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5239(d)(1)(D), each operator of a public transportation system must develop a safety plan which includes ‘‘a process and timeline for conducting an annual review and update of the safety plan.’’ In light of this statutory language, today’s final rule requires each transit agency to establish a process and timeline for conducting a review and update of its VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34433 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations safety plan, and this review and update must occur at least annually. 49 CFR 673.11(a)(5). Given the diversity in transit systems across the country, and given each transit agency’s unique operating environment, FTA is deferring to each transit agency to determine, for itself, the frequency of its safety plan reviews and updates each year, and the process for doing so. Each transit agency must certify compliance with these requirements through its annual Certifications and Assurances to FTA. FTA disagrees with the commenters who proposed that the annual review period for the safety plans be changed to a less frequent time period, such as two years, three years, four years, or five years. The statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(D) do not provide that latitude. Notwithstanding the statute, as a matter of a best safety practice, FTA believes that each transit agency should annually review its process for hazard identification and risk analysis in an effort to prevent safety events. As a transit agency collects data through the hazard identification and risk analysis processes, the transit agency should be evaluating its safety performance targets to determine whether they need to be changed, as well. FTA agrees with the commenter who suggested that along with an annual review, a transit agency should update its safety plan at any point when risk assessments result in the need for substantial safety mitigation, or if there are significant changes to asset inventory, condition assessments, or investment prioritization. Regarding the annual reviews of SSPPs, FTA notes that under its new public transportation safety program, the requirements for SSPPs under the former regulatory provisions of FTA’s SSO rule at 49 CFR part 659 have been eliminated. Today’s requirement for a PTASP under 49 CFR part 673 replaces the old requirement for an SSPP under 49 CFR part 659. Therefore, annual reviews of the PTASP now will be required, and SSPPs will become obsolete for rail transit agencies one year after the effective date of this final rule. Finally, regarding the National Public Transportation Safety Plan, FTA will update the National Public Transportation Safety Plan when it believes it is necessary to do so, based on safety needs in the public transportation industry. FTA notes that it must make any changes to the National Public Transportation Safety Plan through the public notice and comment process, and the transit industry will have the opportunity to provide input on any changes to this document. Furthermore, FTA believes that changes to the National Public Transportation Safety Plan will not necessarily cause transit agencies to update their PTASPs. Currently, the National Public Transportation Safety Plan and the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans are linked through the requirements for performance targets in agency safety plans based on the performance measures in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. 7. Emergency Preparedness and Response Plans Comments: Pursuant to the proposed provisions of 49 CFR 673.11(a)(6), each rail transit agency would be required to include an emergency preparedness and response plan in its safety plan. Although a commenter noted that there is no statutory language in 49 U.S.C. 5329 which requires emergency preparedness and response plans, the commenter agreed that this type of plan is important and should be included in safety plans. One commenter supported the requirement that transit agencies develop a plan for the delegation of responsibilities during an emergency, but encouraged FTA to include in the final rule a requirement that ensures transit agencies provide adequate training for workers responsible for tasks during emergencies. Two commenters suggested that FTA should provide transit agencies with the option of separating their safety plans and their emergency preparedness and response plans, developing them as two separate documents. One of these commenters suggested that these documents are fundamentally different and the emergency preparedness and response plan contains information that should not be widely distributed. One of these commenters suggested that some transit agencies that have not previously complied with 49 CFR part 659 may have difficulty developing a robust emergency preparedness and response plan. This commenter also stated that FTA should take into consideration the time and resources needed to develop a comprehensive emergency response plan by publishing templates for these plans, offering assistance to those transit agencies developing them for the first time, and extending the implementation deadline for this final rule. Another commenter requested clarification regarding whether this final rule would require a System Security Plan and an emergency preparedness and response plan to be separate documents. One commenter suggested that FTA revise the rule to allow a transit agency to include or reference the emergency preparedness and response plan in its safety plan. This commenter said this revision would be consistent with the intent of FTA in the Section-by-Section Analysis portion of the NPRM which states that this section would require that each rail transit agency ‘‘include, or incorporate by reference’’ the emergency preparedness plan in its safety plan. Another commenter asked FTA to clarify the relationship between the emergency preparedness and response plans required in this rule to the emergency preparedness and response plans required in the former SSO provisions of 49 CFR 659.19(k). Response: Although the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5329 do not require emergency preparedness and response plans, FTA’s State Safety Oversight Rule historically has required rail transit agencies to have emergency preparedness and response plans as part of their SSPPs. Since rail transit agencies already have these plans in place, FTA is carrying over the requirement for those plans into today’s rule. FTA’s intent is to make transit safer, not to make transit less safe by eliminating historical requirements that have proven to be effective. FTA acknowledges the potential burdens on transit agencies that do not have these plans in place, and therefore, FTA only is requiring emergency preparedness and response plans from rail transit agencies, which should already have them in place. FTA agrees with the commenter who suggested that these plans are important, as recent safety events have demonstrated the need and utility of emergency preparedness and response plans, particularly for rail transit systems. FTA agrees that rail transit agencies should develop plans to include the delegation of responsibilities during an emergency. FTA is deferring to transit agencies on how to document their emergency preparedness and response plans, and FTA will allow transit agencies to combine, include, incorporate by reference, or separate their emergency preparedness and response plans and their safety plans. FTA is issuing templates and guidance for safety plans concurrently with the issuance of today’s final rule. FTA intends to develop guidance specific to emergency preparedness and response plans in the future. FTA also will provide technical assistance to rail transit agencies that are modifying or developing emergency preparedness and response plans. FTA notes that it no longer is requiring System Security Plans as previously required for rail transit agencies under the former regulatory VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34434 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations provisions of 49 CFR part 659—the responsibility for the oversight of transit security resides with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration (TSA). However, to the extent that a transit agency has a security plan, FTA will allow a transit agency to incorporate the security plan into its safety plan, if the transit agency desires. In light of the above, FTA is revising the language in today’s final rule to match the intent referenced in the NPRM’s Section-by-Section Analysis, which states that each rail transit agency is required to ‘‘include, or incorporate by reference’’ an emergency preparedness and response plan in its safety plan. FTA directs readers to its SSPP–PTASP Crosswalk interim guidance document for further information on the relationship between SSPPs and PTASPs (https:// www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/ files/docs/PTSP_NPRM_SSPP_Side_by_ Side.pdf). Additional guidance will be forthcoming, and FTA will post it on its website (see https:// www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and- guidance/safety/transit-safety-oversight- tso). 8. Multiple Modes of Transit Service Comments: A few commenters supported FTA’s proposed flexibility for transit agencies to develop one safety plan for all modes of transit. A couple of commenters stated that they would develop one safety plan for all modes. One of these commenters stated that updating and monitoring several plans is unrealistic and increases the workload and approval processes. This commenter also asked if FTA would issue rules specific to locally operated transit systems. A couple of commenters encouraged the use of one safety plan that encompasses all modes of transportation. A commenter stated that if a transit agency develops one safety plan for all transportation modes, then that transit agency should identify those portions of its system that are regulated by another Federal entity and include any additional requirements from those Federal entities in the safety plan. One commenter suggested that safety plans for all transit modes creates a difficult regulatory process for SSOAs, since SSOAs have regulatory authority over the rail mode only. This commenter recommended that FTA require rail transit agencies to develop a separate plan for rail, since the safety plan must be submitted to the SSOA for review and approval. Alternatively, the commenter requested that FTA include specific processes for SSOAs and rail transit agencies when dealing with a single plan covering multiple modes. Response: FTA agrees with and appreciates the commenters who would like the flexibility to either have one safety plan or multiple safety plans for multiple modes of transit service. As FTA stated in the NPRM, it intends to allow flexibility and choice so that transit agencies may draft multiple plans or only one plan, as there are many different sizes and types of transit agencies—a single plan may work better for some agencies, whereas multiple plans for multiple modes of transit service may work better for others (especially the larger transit agencies that have multiple divisions and operate commuter rail, heavy rail, light rail, bus, and other transit modes). FTA disagrees with commenters who would like to develop a single plan for all modes of transportation service, particularly service that is regulated by another Federal entity, such as FRA. Other Federal regulators may have specific requirements for safety plans that fall under their jurisdiction that may conflict with this final rule. Notably, FRA’s statutory and regulatory framework for rail safety provides data protection in safety plans; FTA’s statutory and regulatory framework does not. FTA is concerned that combining PTASPs and FRA-regulated safety plans would result in a loss of that data protection for the rail safety covered by FRA. Therefore, FTA will not allow a transit agency to combine its PTASP with a safety plan for service regulated by another Federal agency. FTA disagrees that SSOAs will have difficulty approving safety plans that address rail and bus service. Indeed, SSOAs have regulatory authority over rail transit service only, and SSOAs should review only the rail components of safety plans. FTA will provide additional guidance and training in the future to assist SSOAs with their review and oversight of PTASPs and SMS. D. State and Transit Agency Roles 1. Large Transit Agencies Comments: One commenter recommended that the rule detail the requirements applicable to large transit agencies. Response: Pursuant to this rule, every operator of a public transportation system—large and small—must comply with each of the requirements outlined in today’s final rule, unless the operator only receives Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds. All sections and requirements of this rule as outlined in 49 CFR part 673 are applicable to large transit agencies, specifically, rail fixed guideway public transportation systems and recipients and subrecipients of FTA funds under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 that operate more than 100 vehicles in peak revenue service. 2. Small Public Transportation Providers, Section 5311 Providers, and Section 5310 Providers 2.1. States Must Draft and Certify Safety Plans on Behalf of Small Public Transportation Providers 2.1.1. Option for State-Wide or Agency- Specific Safety Plans Comments: Several commenters responded to FTA’s question as to whether FTA should require States to draft a single state-wide plan; individual safety plans for each Section 5310, Section 5311, and small public transportation provider located within that State; or defer to the State’s preference. A few commenters recommended that each State should have the flexibility to choose whether the State will develop and certify a single state-wide plan or draft individual safety plans on for each agency. One commenter stated that the State should be required to draft an umbrella plan for more than just ‘‘small public transportation providers’’ and an agency can choose to use that plan or develop their own plan that complies with the overarching plan. Another commenter stated that state-wide plans should be generic and that States should develop an SMS that would be flexible enough to meet the needs of each of the individual transit agencies within their jurisdictions. This commenter also asked what might happen when a transit agency’s safety plan differs from another transit agency’s safety plan drafted by their State. One commenter suggested a ‘‘hybrid’’ approach whereby the State may draft a single safety plan, and include appendices that incorporate unique situations for certain transit agencies. Another commenter suggested that if a State develops a state-wide plan, then all transit providers should be required to provide copies of their plans and self-certifications to the State. One commenter asserted that small urban and rural operations likely will be different, and if a State must draft separate safety plans for each transit agency, then this effort will be burdensome. On the other hand, the commenter asserted, if the State drafts only a single safety plan for all transit agencies under this regulatory provision, then the safety plans may be ineffective and meaningless. In response to FTA’s question as to how a single state-wide safety plan could respond to the Safety Risk VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34435 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations Management component of SMS (such as the identification of risks and hazards for each unique transit agency), several commenters stated there are already processes in place at State Departments of Transportation that can integrate individual SMS components of Safety Risk Management for small bus public transportation providers to enable the drafting of a state-wide agency safety plan. Response: To provide maximum flexibility for States and transit providers, FTA is deferring to the States and the small public transportation providers within those States to determine whether each State will draft and certify a single state-wide safety plan for all small public transportation providers or whether it will draft and certify multiple individualized safety plans for each of these transit operators. FTA recommends as a best practice that each State draft and certify individualized safety plans on behalf of each of these small public transportation providers given the inherently unique safety concerns, issues, hazards, and risks for each transit operator. If a State drafts a single state-wide safety plan, then the State must ensure that the plan clearly identifies each transit operator that the plan will cover, the names of the Accountable Executives and Chief Safety Officers, the safety performance targets for each transit operator (and determined in conjunction with each operator), and the hazard identification, risk analysis, Safety Assurance, and other SMS processes for each transit operator (and developed in conjunction with each transit operator). FTA notes that, in this rule, States are not required to draft and certify safety plans on behalf of transit operators that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds. As discussed above, FTA is deferring regulatory action regarding the applicability of this rule on these operators until a later date. 2.1.2. Drafting and Certifying Safety Plans for Small Section 5307 Providers Comments: Several commenters suggested that States should not be required to draft and certify safety plans for small Section 5307 providers in large urbanized areas because these providers are not subrecipients of funds apportioned to States, they have a direct funding relationship with FTA, States do not review their grant applications, States do not review their NTD reports, and States do not provide their oversight. A few of these commenters only supported the requirement that States draft and certify safety plans on behalf of open door Section 5310 and Section 5311 subrecipients. A couple of commenters supported the requirement that a State draft and certify safety plans on behalf of small Section 5307 providers operating 100 or fewer vehicles, as long as the final rule clarifies that the ‘‘100 vehicles in revenue service’’ criteria applies only to Section 5307 recipients, not Section 5310 or Section 5311 recipients. Response: FTA notes that 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(3)(B) provides that States may draft or certify safety plans on behalf of ‘‘small public transportation providers’’ that receive Section 5307 funds, even though, for recipients in large urbanized areas, no funding relationship exists between the States and those small Section 5307 recipients. In response to comments and to ensure consistency across FTA’s safety rules and Transit Asset Management rule, FTA is defining ‘‘small public transportation provider’’ to mean ‘‘a recipient or subrecipient of Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5307 that has one hundred (100) or fewer vehicles in peak revenue service and does not operate a rail fixed guideway public transportation system.’’ A small Section 5307 provider may opt to draft and certify its own safety plan. FTA notes that it received numerous comments requesting reduced requirements for small public transportation providers. Given their limited resources, FTA believes that a reduction in requirements for small public transportation providers is appropriate, and to that end, FTA eliminated Safety Assurance requirements for all small public transportation providers under 49 CFR 673.27(a). 2.2. Other Comments Comments: One commenter expressed a concern about potential conflicts of interest regarding the drafting and certifying of safety plans. This commenter stated that if a State drafts and certifies a safety plan on behalf of a transit operator, and if the State is also the grant manager for the transit agency using the safety plan, then the State may monitor compliance with the safety plan that it drafted through grant compliance reviews. The commenter suggested that this situation may create a conflict of interest, similar to the conflict of interest that would arise if an SSOA drafted and certified a safety plan on behalf a rail transit agency subject to its jurisdiction. One commenter asked whether a small transit provider may continue to use its safety plan drafted by its State if it grows to a size where it no longer would be considered small. In this scenario, the commenter asked how much time the transit provider would have to draft and certify a new safety plan. One commenter recommended that FTA clarify the definition of the term ‘‘State’’ so that SSOAs would not draft or develop a transit agency’s safety plan if a conflict of interest exists. Additionally, the commenter suggested adding the following language at the end of section 49 CFR 673.11: ‘‘the State Safety Oversight Agency cannot be involved in the development of the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans they are charged with overseeing.’’ Response: FTA disagrees with the commenter who suggested that a potential conflict of interest would exist if a State drafted and certified a safety plan on behalf of a small transit provider. The funding relationships created by Congress differ from the new safety relationships in 49 U.S.C. 5329(d). From a federal perspective, the State has no role in safety enforcement or oversight of small Section 5307 providers. For rail transit agencies, the SSOAs serve in a different, independent role, and they are required by 49 U.S.C. 5329(e) to provide enforcement. Moreover, as a legal matter, the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d) require States to draft and certify safety plans on behalf of small Section 5307 providers. If a transit agency grows in size so that it no longer is considered ‘‘small,’’ then it would have one year to draft and certify its own safety plan. The safety plan developed by the State would remain in effect until the transit agency drafts its own safety plan. Finally, FTA does not agree that the rule text should be clarified to distinguish between a State’s role and an SSOA’s role in the development and certification of safety plans. The rule provides that a State must draft and certify safety plans only on behalf of small public transportation providers that do not operate rail service, and that an SSOA must review and approve a rail transit agency’s safety plan. 3. Small Transit Providers May Draft and Certify Their Own Safety Plans Comments: Many commenters asserted that, when a transit agency ‘‘opts out’’ of the state-wide safety plan and drafts and certifies its own plan, then the final rule should clarify that the State has no further obligation related to the safety plan. One commenter observed that the ‘‘opt out’’ provision places the decision on a State’s responsibilities in the hands VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34436 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations of its subrecipients instead of the State, which is where that responsibility exists in the context of funding relationships. The commenter recommended that FTA clarify in the final rule that the State is responsible for its own safety plan and for those of its subrecipients, and that the determination of whether the State will draft plans for its subrecipients remains at the discretion of the State. Response: If a transit agency ‘‘opts out’’ and decides to draft and certify its own safety plan, then the State has no further responsibility regarding that safety plan and the transit agency may seek guidance and technical assistance directly from FTA. FTA disagrees with the commenter who suggested that States should have the discretion to draft and certify safety plans. In an effort to reduce the administrative and financial burdens of small public transportation providers, and given the statutory requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d), FTA is requiring States to draft and certify safety plans on behalf of small Section 5307 recipients and subrecipients. FTA is providing those recipients and subrecipients with the discretion to ‘‘opt out’’ of this arrangement (however, the State will not have the option to ‘‘opt out,’’ as this discretion lies with the small transit operator). 4. Direct and Designated Recipients Drafting and Certifying Safety Plans on Behalf of Smaller Transit Providers Comments: Several commenters responded to FTA’s question about whether a Section 5310 recipient should draft and certify their own safety plans if they are direct recipients, instead of having the States draft and certify their safety plans on their behalf. Many commenters stated that the designated or direct recipient should have this responsibility for themselves, given the fact that they do not receive their funds through the State under recent changes to the Section 5310 program under the FAST Act. One commenter supported the idea of having designated recipients draft and certify their own safety plans, as well as their subrecipients, only if the plans are based on templates provided by FTA. One commenter asked whether the State or the transit agency should be responsible for reviewing safety plans when a subrecipient receives funding through the transit agency and not the State. Response: FTA appreciates the comments that it received regarding this issue. In light of the public comments that FTA received regarding the application of this rule to Section 5310 and Section 5311 recipients, FTA is deferring regulatory action regarding the applicability of this rule to operators of public transportation systems that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds. Further evaluation of information and safety data related to these operators is needed to determine the appropriate level of regulatory burden necessary to address the safety risk presented by these operators. At this time, the rule does not apply to an operator of a public transportation system that only receives Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5310, 49 U.S.C. 5311, or both 49 U.S.C. 5310 and 49 U.S.C. 5311. Consequently, States are not required to draft and certify safety plans on behalf of operators of public transportation systems that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds. Consistent with the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(3)(B), a State still has the responsibility of drafting and certifying safety plans on behalf of small Section 5307 recipients, unless they opt to draft and certify their own safety plans. To ease the burdens with these efforts, FTA is issuing a safety plan template with today’s rule to assist States and smaller operators with the drafting and certification of their plans. E. Existing System Safety Program Plan Is Effective for One Year 1. General Comments Comments: A couple of commenters suggested that the final SSO rule and the proposed PTASP rule are contradictory in terms of implementation deadlines, and they recommended that FTA allow an SSPP to remain in effect until an SSOA has approved a rail transit agency’s new PTASP. One of these commenters stated that FTA should remove all requirements involving SSPPs from the final PTASP rule. One commenter asked if a rail transit agency must keep its SSPP and reference it in its PTASP. Response: FTA acknowledges that the compliance dates in the final SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674 differ from those in the PTASP rule at 49 CFR part 673. These compliance dates are creations of statute. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5329(e)(3), each State must have an SSO program compliant with the new SSO rule within three years after the effective date of that final rule. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1), each operator of a public transportation system must have a PTASP compliant with the new PTASP rule within one year after the effective date of this final rule. Although these compliance dates differ, an SSOA can apply the regulatory requirements of the PTASP rule and ultimately review and approve a PTASP based on those requirements, even if it has not fully developed its new program standard in accordance with the new SSO rule. As demonstrated through the SSPP–PTASP Crosswalk that FTA posted to this rulemaking docket, the substantive elements of the old SSPPs carry over into the SMS portions of PTASPs. The same basic requirements exist, albeit, reshuffled into a different format that is intended to more effectively address safety risks. Finally, the staff of SSOAs have been taking training courses in SMS in accordance with the interim rule for the Public Transportation Safety Certification Training Program. Given the above, FTA expects each SSOA to review and approve each PTASP of a rail transit agency within its jurisdiction, even if it has not fully complied with the new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674. Ultimately, the SSPP will become obsolete one year after the effective date of this final rule, and an agency’s PTASP will replace the SSPP. However, if a transit agency would like to maintain the SSPP and use it as a reference document, it may do so. FTA only will conduct oversight, including Triennial and State Management Reviews, to ensure that a transit agency’s PTASP complies with this rule, not its former SSPP. Given the April 15, 2019 deadline for updated SSO Programs under 49 CFR 674.11, FTA believes that the effective date and compliance date of today’s final rule will provide rail transit agencies and their SSOAs with more time to harmonize their safety plans and program standards before they are finalized. 2. One-Year Compliance Timeframe Comments: Several commenters provided input on the one-year compliance timeframe for the proposed rule. One commenter expressed support for the one-year compliance period, but stated that transit agencies may need more than one year to draft their safety plans, hire and train the necessary personnel, and certify the plan. Some commenters stated that FTA should provide a longer compliance/ implementation period for the rule. Several of these commenters remarked that the proposed compliance period is aggressive and may lead to rushed or subpar safety plans with limited SMS training for staff. The commenters also suggested that a longer compliance period may be necessary given the requirements for a signature from the Accountable Executive and approval from a Board of Directors. One commenter suggested that, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34437 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations notwithstanding Federal requirements, State legislatures may not be able to amend State safety requirements prior to the compliance deadline for this rule, which may force some transit agencies to create two safety plans for purposes of Federal and State law, or be in non- compliance with the Federal and State laws. Most commenters provided suggestions for an alternative compliance deadline, with many commenters suggesting that FTA extend the compliance deadline to two years. Several commenters suggested that FTA extend the compliance deadline or allow for a multi-part implementation or a transitional grace period for agencies to show progress with the development of their safety plans. A couple of commenters recommended that FTA extend the compliance period until one year after FTA issues templates for safety plans. One commenter stated that the compliance deadline for this rule should be tied to the finalization of the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. Several commenters also suggested aligning the compliance deadline of this rule with the two-year compliance deadline for the Transit Asset Management rule. Response: As a preliminary matter, FTA notes that many commenters referred to the ‘‘implementation’’ deadline of this final rule, as opposed to the rule’s ‘‘compliance’’ deadline. The compliance deadline is the date by which transit operators and States must comply with the final rule and have a safety plan in place. FTA emphasizes that this rule implements a statutory requirement that each operator of a public transportation system draft and certify a safety plan within one year after the effective date of this final rule. The safety plan must include all of the information, processes, and procedures as outlined in this rule. FTA expects each operator of a public transportation system to ‘‘implement’’ the processes and procedures outlined in its safety plan after it drafts and certifies that plan in accordance with this rule. That implementation should take place continually, and the implementation, particularly the implementation of SMS, should mature over time. But to comply with this rule, each operator of a public transportation system must draft and certify a safety plan within one year after the effective date of this final rule—that one-year deadline is the ‘‘compliance’’ deadline for this rule. The one-year compliance deadline was created by the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1), and FTA does not have the flexibility to extend it. Nevertheless, FTA does not expect that all transit agencies will have fully implemented SMS one year after the effective date, but rather, FTA expects that transit agencies will have the processes and procedures put in place for SMS, including hazard identification, risk analysis, and the Safety Assurance procedures as outlined in Subpart C of this rule. The full implementation of SMS may take longer, in some cases years to fully mature in large multi-modal transit agencies. FTA is providing more guidance on how a transit agency may fully implement a mature SMS in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan, and it intends to provide additional guidance and technical assistance to the industry in the future. FTA appreciates the comments that it received suggesting that transit agencies may need more than one year to certify compliance with the rule. Although, by statute, the compliance deadline must be one year from the rule’s effective date, FTA has discretion on setting the effective date itself. In response to the public comments and in an effort to assist the industry with meeting the requirements of this rule, FTA is making the effective date one year after its publication date. As a result, transit agencies will have a total of two years (one year from the publication date to the effective date, plus another year from the effective date to the compliance deadline) to certify that they have safety plans meeting the requirements of 49 CFR part 673. F. Certification of Safety Plans Comments: Several commenters requested additional information on how agencies may certify compliance with this rule and what this certification means. One commenter remarked that the rule contains neither a definition nor an explanation of the term ‘‘certification’’ or ‘‘certify.’’ Two commenters questioned how an agency may certify their safety plans if FTA may adopt additional performance measures in the future. One commenter expressed concern with self-certification, asserting that self-certification is not a reliable method for establishing effective safety management by public transportation providers. This commenter suggested that each transit agency should submit its safety plan to FTA for approval and certification so that FTA could verify that the plan satisfies the statutory and regulatory requirements. Several commenters expressed concern over the one-year certification timeline, indicating that one year may not be enough time for transit agencies to certify compliance with the rule. One commenter suggested that FTA lengthen the certification period to two years, which would provide agencies with additional time and align the certification deadline for the compliance deadline for developing transit asset management plans as outlined in the TAM rule. One commenter urged FTA to clarify the process by which a State should certify a safety plan on behalf of a Section 5310, Section 5311, or small Section 5307 recipient or sub-recipient. Additionally, the commenter asked who would conduct oversight on a safety plan if a small transit agency opts out of any plan developed by a State. Response: As a statutory matter, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1), each recipient or State must ‘‘certify’’ that the recipient or State has established a comprehensive agency safety plan. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5323(n), each recipient must submit to FTA a list of ‘‘Certifications and Assurances’’ as part of the grant award and oversight process during each fiscal year. FTA will use this existing Certifications and Assurances process to satisfy the statutory requirement for safety plan certifications. FTA has added a section to the list of Certifications and Assurances to address safety. FTA will issue future guidance on how States can certify safety plans and transit asset management plans on behalf of transit operators. To the extent that FTA amends the National Public Transportation Safety Plan in the future, or any of its regulatory requirements in general, FTA will amend the annual list of Certifications and Assurances, as necessary. FTA appreciates concerns regarding the self-certification process; however, FTA does not have the resources to collect and review hundreds of safety plans each fiscal year. Consequently, FTA intends to utilize its existing risk- based approach to oversight by using its Triennial Reviews and State Management Reviews to ensure compliance with this rule. FTA notes that it does not need to wait to review a safety plan every three years. FTA may review an agency’s safety plan whenever it deems necessary. As noted above, in response to the public comments and in an effort to assist the industry with meeting the requirements of this rule, FTA is making the effective date one year after its publication date. As a result, transit agencies will have a total of two years from the rule’s publication date to certify that they have safety plans meeting the requirements of 49 CFR part 673. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34438 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations G. SSOA Review and Approval of PTASPs for Rail Transit Systems Comments: Pursuant to the proposed provisions at 49 CFR 673.13(a), each SSOA would be required to review and approve a PTASP developed by a rail fixed guideway system. Some commenters expressed concern with the one-year deadline that a transit agency has to certify its PTASP and the three- year deadline that an SSOA has to comply with the new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674. One commenter recommended that FTA should allow rail transit agencies to certify compliance with the PTASP rule one year after the relevant SSOA develops its program standard pursuant to 49 CFR part 674. Several commenters questioned whether a rail transit agency must submit its PTASP to the SSOA by one year after the PTASP final rule’s effective date, or whether the SSOA must approve the agency’s PTASP by one year after the PTASP rule’s effective date. Several commenters urged FTA to clarify whether SSOAs must update their program standards prior to approving rail transit safety plans since most SSOAs will be operating under a program standard based on 49 CFR part 659 when the PTASP final rule becomes effective. A few commenters requested FTA to clarify the role of an SSOA with respect to PTASP certification. One commenter suggested that a PTASP should not be executed without SSOA approval. Several commenters suggested that FTA develop guidance for obtaining SSOA approval and a resolution process for situations in which a rail transit agency certifies compliance and then an SSOA does not approve the safety plan. Several commenters requested clarification of an SSOA’s approval power and role, with a couple of these commenters encouraging FTA to modify the rule’s text to make clear that SSOAs only have authority over rail transit systems. One commenter recommended that FTA require transit agencies that operate rail and bus service to develop separate safety plans for rail and bus service so that it is easier for SSOAs to approve the plans for rail safety. A few commenters stated that FTA should define the SSOA’s role and responsibilities in approving plans that contain modes of service not subject to state specific oversight rules, such as rules for bus transit. The commenters argued that while SSOAs are responsible for the review and approval of rail transit plans, FTA’s proposed rule only specifies that bus agencies will self-certify. Several commenters expressed concerns over the requirement to have the transit agency’s Board of Directors and the SSOA approve the safety plan, fearing that this two-tiered review process could subject plans to conflicting evaluation criteria, which could weaken plans and cause delays in implementation. One commenter suggested that FTA should clarify that SSPPs will become obsolete. Response: As a preliminary matter, FTA notes that the comments above regarding state safety oversight are more appropriately addressed through FTA’s SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674, which governs the activities of SSOAs. FTA’s PTASP rule governs the activities of operators of public transportation systems. Nevertheless, to provide the industry with additional clarification regarding the role of SSOAs, FTA provides the responses below. Through FTA’s new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674, each SSOA has a great deal of flexibility regarding the timing of its approval of a PTASP within its jurisdiction. Pursuant to the new rule, each SSOA is obliged to ‘‘adopt and distribute a written SSO program standard’’ consistent with the National Public Transportation Safety Plan and the PTASP rule (49 CFR 674.27(a)); ‘‘explain’’ an SSOA’s ‘‘role . . . in overseeing’’ a rail transit agency’s ‘‘execution of its Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan’’ (49 CFR 674.27(a)(4)); and ‘‘describe the process whereby the SSOA will receive and evaluate all material submitted under the signature of [a rail transit agency’s] accountable executive’’ (49 CFR 674.27(a)(4)). Given these requirements, an SSOA could choose to ‘‘approve’’ a PTASP at virtually any point in time, and as often as it might like. FTA expects each SSOA to develop its program standard in consultation with the rail transit agencies within the SSOA’s jurisdiction. FTA intends to provide deference to the State decision makers on this matter. Optimally, an SSOA would have its program standard in place before reviewing the merits of a rail transit agency’s PTASP, but it is not necessary, as a matter of law. An SSOA still operating under the old SSO rule at 49 CFR part 659 and transitioning to the new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674 still can judge the adequacy of a rail transit agency’s PTASP by applying the standards and regulatory requirements set forth in the new rules at 49 CFR parts 673 and 674. Through the new SSO rule, FTA addresses scenarios in which an SSOA does not approve a PTASP. Pursuant to 49 CFR 674.29(c), ‘‘In an instance in which an SSOA does not approve a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan, the SSOA must provide a written explanation, and allow the [rail transit agency] an opportunity to modify and resubmit its . . . Plan for the SSOA’s approval.’’ This mechanism should lead to negotiations that resolve disagreements between an SSOA and a rail transit agency. In those instances in which an SSOA and a rail transit agency continue to disagree in good faith, FTA may step into the dispute to help the issue. If a rail transit agency is comfortable certifying its own compliance with the rules, but it receives objections or disapprovals from its SSOA, then FTA could take regulatory enforcement action under the Public Transportation Safety Program rule at 49 CFR part 670 (see https:// www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-08-11/ pdf/2016-18920.pdf), as necessary and appropriate, to ensure compliance with the PTASP rule. It is abundantly clear in 49 U.S.C. 5329(e) and FTA’s new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674 that an SSOA only has jurisdiction over a ‘‘rail fixed guideway public transportation system’’ that is not subject to regulation by FRA. Consequently, when reviewing a PTASP for an agency that operates rail fixed guideway public transportation and bus public transportation, an SSOA should focus its review on the rail fixed guideway public transportation system only, given the fact that as a legal matter, Federal law does not give an SSOA the authority to regulate the safety of bus systems. Unless provided by State law, an SSOA has no legal authority to compel a transit agency to change its safety practices for bus operations. FTA disagrees with the commenters who believe that FTA should require separate safety plans for rail and bus; FTA will defer to each transit agency to decide whether it is more appropriate for their system to have a single plan covering rail and bus (and other modes of transit) or whether to have multiple plans for each mode of transit. Finally, FTA re-emphasizes that every operator of a public transportation system subject to this rule, or State, must certify compliance with this rule, whether it provides rail transit service, bus transit service, or other modes of transit service. SSPPs will become obsolete one year after the effective date of this final rule. H. Safety Performance Targets and Performance-Based Planning Comments: Pursuant to the proposed provisions at 49 CFR 673.15, each VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34439 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations transit agency or State would be required to make its safety performance targets available to States and MPOs to aid in the planning process, and each transit agency or State would be required to coordinate with States and MPOs in the selection of safety performance targets. Several commenters generally supported the coordination provisions. One commenter supported flexibility in the target-setting process and coordination of targets between the State, regional, and transit agency levels. One commenter was encouraged that FTA acknowledged the vital role of the planning process in safety management and recommended that the Transit Asset Management Plans also be included in the coordination process. A couple of commenters asked FTA to explain the purpose of communicating safety performance targets to States and MPOs. One commenter asked FTA to clarify the MPO’s role in the planning process, stating that if an MPO has any approval or review authority of safety performance targets, then an MPO should be required to have the same safety expertise and training as an SSOA. Several commenters asked whether a transit agency only would be required to make its targets available to a State and an MPO, or whether it also would be required to make the supporting performance data pertaining to those targets available to a State and an MPO. One commenter suggested that FTA avoid creating this requirement or to make a general requirement that transit agencies cooperate with States and MPOs in the planning process. Several commenters expressed concerns with requiring coordination among planning organizations. They argued that this coordination would be unreasonably burdensome on some transit agencies. Several commenters argued that these provisions are not required by statute and that MPOs generally do not operate transit service and do not have transit operations and safety expertise or experience. Several commenters suggested that coordination should be revised to a ‘‘consultation’’ requirement. One commenter recommended that FTA delete these requirements, and that planning coordination should be encouraged through guidance instead. Several commenters requested clarification on how a State or transit agency should coordinate with MPOs and States to select safety performance targets. One of these commenters argued that if by ‘‘coordination,’’ FTA’s intent is that a transit agency share its PTASP (which will include performance targets) with States and MPOs, then FTA should clearly state such a requirement. Additionally, the commenter stated that the proposed rule did not specify which State agencies, other than MPOs, transit agencies are expected to coordinate with. Several commenters asked which accountability measures will be used to ensure that coordination is occurring ‘‘to the maximum extent practicable.’’ One commenter asked what recourse an MPO would have if the State or transit operator chooses not to coordinate on target setting, claiming there is not a ‘‘practicable’’ way to do so. The commenter argued that the rule must recognize that target setting across multiple functions and dimensions would require an extremely robust degree of coordination and suggested removing that phrase. One commenter stated that the proposed rule does not identify the responsibilities of the State in the planning process. Another commenter asked whether States and MPOs would be required to keep confidential any information related to safety performance targets. One commenter stated that it is unclear how the development of performance targets at the State and MPO levels will impact individual transit agency targets in the future, particularly when FTA may develop safety performance targets under a separate NPRM. This commenter also said it is unclear how the State and MPO safety performance targets would impact individual transit agency safety plans, as these are to be determined at the local level by each individual transit agency. Response: FTA appreciates the comments that it received in support of its proposed safety performance target provisions. FTA emphasizes that these requirements are rooted in the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(E), which requires each operator of a public transportation system subject to this rule to include in its PTASP ‘‘performance targets based on [FTA’s] safety performance criteria and state of good repair standards.’’ Moreover, the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5303(h)(2)(B) and 49 U.S.C. 5304(d)(2)(B) further require that ‘‘[s]election of performance targets by a metropolitan planning organization shall be coordinated, to the maximum extent practicable, with providers of public transportation to ensure consistency with sections . . . 5329(d)’’ and ‘‘[s]election of performance targets by a State shall be coordinated with the relevant metropolitan planning organizations to ensure consistency to the maximum extent practicable.’’ Since these activities are required by law, FTA will not merely encourage these practices through guidance, as some commenters requested. FTA will require these practices as a legal matter. Moreover, FTA emphasizes that the PTASP rule only governs the activities of operators of public transportation systems. The recent FTA/FHWA joint planning rule 23 CFR part 450 governs the planning activities of transit agencies, States, and MPOs. FTA refers readers to the Final Rule dated May 27, 2016, for further guidance on the roles and responsibilities of States and MPOs in the planning process (see https:// www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-05-27/ pdf/2016-11964.pdf). In response to the question as to whether a transit agency only would be required to make its safety performance targets available to a State and an MPO, or whether it also would be required to make the supporting performance data pertaining to those targets available to a State and an MPO, FTA defers to the State and local processes developed by States and MPOs. FTA only requires that transit agencies coordinate with States and MPOs to the maximum extent practicable to assist those States and MPOs with the selection of Statewide and regional safety performance targets. At a minimum, FTA requires each operator of a public transportation agency to make its safety performance targets available to States and MPOs. To ensure that a transit agency complies with these requirements, FTA intends to utilize its existing Triennial Reviews and State Management Reviews. FTA intends to ensure that MPOs comply with the joint planning rule through the existing MPO certification process. Finally, FTA notes that it is not developing safety performance targets for the industry—it is developing safety performance measures by which each operator of a public transportation system, and each State and MPO, must set targets. These targets are intended to guide transit agencies, States, and MPOs with the prioritization of transportation investments. The goal is for the prioritization of capital investments that help meet safety performance targets and state of good repair targets. I. Safety Management Systems 1. Safety Management Policy: General Comments Comments: Numerous commenters expressed general support for the proposed Safety Management Policy provisions of 49 CFR 673.23. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34440 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations Response: FTA appreciates the support from the transit industry on Safety Management Systems, and specifically the Safety Management Policy provisions of 49 CFR 673.23. 1.1. Safety Management Policy Statement Comments: Several commenters encouraged FTA to allow for maximum flexibility in safety management policy statements and urged FTA to allow deviation in policy adoption whenever consistent with the overarching principles of SMS. A few commenters expressed concern regarding the inclusion of safety performance targets in the safety management policy statement. One commenter suggested that it is inappropriate to include specific safety performance targets in an overarching safety management policy statement and suggested deleting the requirement from the rule. This commenter also suggested that FTA replace the term SMS with PTASP where references to safety performance targets are made. Another commenter urged FTA to clarify that the intent of including safety performance targets in the safety management policy statement is not to require annual updates of the target values, but rather, the measures that the targets address. Response: FTA agrees with the commenters who suggested that the inclusion of safety performance targets in the safety management policy statement is unnecessary, and FTA has updated the rule text, accordingly. The location of this requirement under the ‘‘Safety Management Policy’’ section of this rule is redundant, given the fact that FTA is requiring each transit agency to establish safety performance targets through the ‘‘General Requirements’’ section of this rule at 49 CFR 673.11(a)(3). If a transit agency wishes to include its safety performance targets in its safety management policy, it may do so, although it may identify those targets in another section of its safety plan. The rule text in 49 CFR 673.23 now reads, ‘‘A transit agency must establish its organizational accountabilities and responsibilities and have a written statement of safety management policy that includes the agency’s safety objectives.’’ To clarify, during a transit agency’s annual review and update of its safety plan (which is required under 49 CFR 673.11(a)(5)), a transit agency may need to update its safety performance targets based on the data and safety conditions at that time, but a transit agency may not necessarily need to alter its target values each year. A transit agency only needs to examine them and decide, for itself, whether it should amend them. 1.2. Employee Reporting Program Comments: Numerous commenters expressed support for FTA’s proposed employee reporting program. Several commenters urged FTA to provide more detail on the requirements for employee reporting programs. Two commenters suggested that FTA encourage transit agencies to establish ‘‘close call’’ reporting programs. Another commenter requested guidance from FTA on how reports from employee reporting programs would be protected from disclosure. One commenter supported non- punitive employee reporting, but stated that disciplinary actions for employee safety behaviors are the subject of collective bargaining at the majority of transit systems. As such, the commenter stated that collective bargaining agreements may affect disciplinary actions in employee reporting programs. Response: FTA appreciates the support for employee reporting programs and believes it is an essential part of a transit agency’s SMS. Pursuant to 49 CFR 673.23(b), FTA is requiring each transit agency to ‘‘establish a process that allows employees to report safety conditions to senior management,’’ and FTA is providing significant latitude and flexibility to transit agencies to determine their own processes for the reporting of safety conditions. These reporting processes could include hotlines, web-based reporting systems, form-based reporting systems, or direct reporting to management, but ultimately, each transit agency must decide the process and procedures that will work best within that individual agency. ‘‘Close call’’ reporting systems are a type of employee reporting, and FTA strongly supports the establishment of close call reporting systems, although these systems are not required. Currently, FTA does not have statutory protections in place to protect safety information from public disclosure, as is the case with FRA and the System Safety Programs required of commuter and intercity passenger railroads under 49 CFR part 270 (see http://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/Details/ L18294). FTA requested these protections through the ‘‘Grow America Act’’. Following this request, in Section 3021 of the FAST Act, Congress authorized a study ‘‘on evidentiary protection for public transportation safety program information.’’ The results of this study will help inform the need to develop statutory and regulatory protections for safety data. Finally, FTA acknowledges that disciplinary actions for employee safety behaviors may be the subject of collective bargaining agreements throughout the country. Consequently, many transit agencies may need to work with their labor unions to establish employee safety reporting programs that fit the needs of management and a transit agency’s operational and maintenance staff. 1.3. Safety Accountabilities and Responsibilities Comments: Two commenters expressed concern over the requirement that each transit agency employ an Accountable Executive and either a Chief Safety Officer or an SMS Executive. These commenters argued that this requirement could be overly burdensome for rural, specialized, tribal, or small transit systems where the administrative staff could be limited to only a single executive. One commenter suggested that FTA add language in the final rule that requires small transit agencies to hire necessary safety personnel. Another commenter urged FTA to clarify whether the Chief Safety Officer must be a direct employee of the transit agency or whether the Chief Safety Officer may be a position held by a part-time employee. A few commenters provided input on the role of the Chief Safety Officer and other SMS executives. One commenter urged FTA to clarify the role of the Accountable Executive in relation to the Chief Safety Officer and the transit agency’s Chief Executive Officer. The commenter argued that the proposed rule would require the Accountable Executive to implement and maintain SMS, but that responsibility should belong to the Chief Safety Officer. One commenter suggested that FTA identify the link between the transit agency’s Chief Safety Officer or SMS Executive and the operations and asset management departments, which is integral for a successful SMS. Response: FTA appreciates the comments that it received regarding the Accountable Executive and the Chief Safety Officer (or SMS Executive), however, FTA is requiring that each transit agency identify individuals to fill these positions in its system. FTA clarified in the NPRM for this rule, and it is clarifying again here, that at many smaller transit agencies, roles and responsibilities may be more fluid and shared. Nevertheless, even in circumstances where responsibilities are either shared or delegated, each transit agency must identify a single primary decision-maker, or ‘‘Accountable Executive,’’ who is ultimately VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34441 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations responsible for controlling the human and financial resources necessary to maintain and implement the transit agency’s safety plan and transit asset management plan. FTA acknowledges that small transit agencies may not have many executive staff, and therefore, FTA is allowing small Section 5307 recipients and subrecipients to identify a Chief Safety Officer, or ‘‘SMS Executive,’’ that may serve other functions, such as operations, maintenance, and grant administration. For these transit agencies, the Chief Safety Officer may be a full-time employee of the transit system who has responsibility for duties other than safety, a part-time employee of the transit system, or a contracted employee. To illustrate, in a small bus agency, the general manager or operations manager may be the same individual as the Chief Safety Officer or SMS Executive. Given the increased safety risks and complex operations associated with rail transit systems, FTA is requiring each rail transit agency to identify a single full-time Chief Safety Officer solely dedicated to safety. These Chief Safety Officers cannot have responsibilities other than safety. Similarly, FTA expects bus transit systems that operate more than 100 vehicles in peak revenue service to have a dedicated Chief Safety Officer, given the increased safety risks in those systems, although, this is not a requirement. The role of the Accountable Executive in relation to the Chief Safety Officer and transit agency’s CEO may vary from system to system. In many cases, as a transit agency’s CEO or president or general manager, that individual likely will serve as the Accountable Executive. The Accountable Executive and the Chief Safety Officer are responsible for implementing and maintaining a transit agency’s SMS, although at smaller transit agencies, this individual may be the same person. Ultimately, as noted above, the Accountable Executive must be the individual with the authority to dedicate the human and financial resources to maintain and implement a transit agency’s safety plan and transit asset management plan. The Accountable Executive should oversee, and the Chief Safety Officer should have a strong working relationship with, the operations and asset management departments at a transit agency in order for SMS to be successful and effective. 2. Safety Risk Management 2.1. Safety Risk Management: General Comments Comments: Two commenters supported the general inclusion of a safety risk management process in a safety plan as detailed in the NPRM, but expressed concern about the level of data collection and assessment activities required. The commenters recommended that FTA provide best practices and technical assistance to assist States and transit agencies with the preparation and execution of safety risk management processes. Similarly, a commenter expressed concerns over the data requirements of the proposed rule, noting that the commenter’s organization employs hazard identification and tracking logs, but the organization now would have to incorporate into its SMS the data obtained through these systems. The commenter asked FTA to clarify if it would need to apply a safety risk management process for paratransit services, and this commenter asked where transit asset management fits into the safety risk management process. While stating that safety risk management is an essential component of SMS, a commenter asserted that the proposed provisions at 49 CFR 673.25 do not specify that hazard analysis, risk assessment, or safety certification is required for new and major capital projects. Additionally, the commenter suggested that the rule fails to address configuration management or risk assessments to system alterations, and it does not require transit agencies to consider the results of asset condition assessments while performing safety hazard identification activities. This commenter also asserted that the proposed rule suggests, but would not require, that the results of asset condition assessments and SMS analysis be considered in the determination of whether an asset meets the SGR standards under FTA’s Transit Asset Management rule at 49 CFR part 625. One commenter asked what the phrases ‘‘new operations of service to the public’’ and ‘‘new operations or maintenance procedures’’ mean, as used in the section-by-section analysis of the proposed 49 CFR 673.25(a). Additionally, the commenter stated that the definition of safety risk management is unclear. Two commenters encouraged FTA to allow flexibility in the hazard identification and risk management processes. One of these commenters stated that transit agencies should be encouraged to incorporate existing hazard identification and risk management processes, and evaluate any new processes that may be more effective. The other commenter asked whether a transit agency must develop its own safety risk management process, or whether FTA will establish a nationwide model. One commenter remarked that there are organizational pressures exerted on the safety staff and other personnel who participate in the safety risk management process to rate safety risk as low as possible. This commenter expressed a hope that with the full implementation of SMS in an organization, these types of organizational pressures would dissipate under a positive safety culture, but cautioned that the development of a positive safety culture could take five to six years, or even longer, in many organizations. Response: FTA appreciates the support from the industry on the proposed safety risk management process. FTA intends this process to be flexible, and it avoided prescriptive requirements in this rule. For example, the level of data collection and assessment activities will vary from agency to agency. For some transit agencies, data collection and analysis processes could be conducted using computer software programs; at other transit agencies, especially at smaller transit agencies, the data collection and analysis processes could involve a transit agency’s management team, staff, and bus operators meeting in a room and discussing the most significant safety hazards and evaluating any associated risks. FTA has produced a safety plan template with this final rule, and it should assist transit agencies with the development of Safety Risk Management processes and considerations. To be clear, this rule applies to any transit service not regulated by another Federal agency, including general public and ADA complementary paratransit service, so each transit service provider will need to develop a safety plan which includes a Safety Risk Management process. Also, each transit agency must apply its Safety Risk Management processes— and all other SMS processes—to all elements of its operations, including the design, construction, and operation of major capital projects, New Starts and Small Starts projects, and any other extension or expansion of transit service. These requirements extend to any ‘‘new operations or maintenance procedures,’’ meaning, any new operations or maintenance processes for railcars, buses, track, facilities, or other service or infrastructure undertaken by VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34442 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations a transit agency. FTA is providing a great deal of flexibility here and is allowing systems to determine the hazards and risks for which it will prioritize and mitigate from an individual agency level. A transit agency also must apply its Safety Risk Management process to its existing operations and maintenance procedures, and all other aspects of its system. Pursuant to 49 CFR 673.5, FTA is defining the term ‘‘Safety Risk Management’’ to mean ‘‘a process within a transit agency’s Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for identifying hazards and analyzing, assessing, and mitigating safety risk.’’ FTA outlines the scope of necessary procedures within Safety Risk Management 49 CFR 673.25. With respect to condition assessments, FTA expects each transit agency to consider the results of its condition assessments undertaken pursuant to its Transit Asset Management plan when it conducts SMS activities. For example, if an asset does not meet a transit agency’s state of good repair targets, then the transit agency may conduct Safety Risk Management activities and analysis to determine whether the asset presents a safety hazard and any safety risks. The transit agency could mitigate any risks and prioritize investments in its capital plan, accordingly. In an effort to provide flexibility and scalability, FTA defers to each transit agency to determine for itself its own processes and procedures for these activities. FTA agrees with commenters who suggested that transit agencies should be encouraged to incorporate existing hazard identification and risk management processes, and utilize any new processes that may provide a more effective means of identifying and addressing safety hazards and safety risks. FTA is providing a safety plan template, technical assistance, and guidance to assist transit agencies with the development and implementation of Safety Risk Management, and it is not applying a one-size-fits-all model for the industry since safety hazards and safety risks vary significantly nationwide. One of the goals of this rule is create stronger and more positive safety cultures within transit agencies, and FTA expects that a transit agency’s personnel would not feel pressure to rate all safety risks as low as possible. To the extent this sentiment exists within a transit agency, FTA anticipates that these types of practices would dissipate as a transit agency implements its SMS over time. FTA agrees that it may take a few months to even a few years to fully implement a mature SMS, and FTA will provide guidance and technical assistance to the industry, as necessary. 2.2. Safety Hazard Identification and Analysis Comments: One commenter suggested that FTA clarify the distinction between safety hazard analysis and safety risk evaluation. This commenter asserted that FTA should articulate this distinction because the concepts of evaluation and analysis are used interchangeably in common language. Another commenter asked FTA to define the term ‘‘consequence.’’ A commenter encouraged FTA to establish standard processes for hazard identification and provided FTA with the hazard analytical methods and safety risk determination techniques adapted from the U.S. Department of Defense’s Military Standard 882 series of standards as a model for national standardization. Similarly, one commenter suggested that FTA specify that transit agencies must utilize data and information from oversight authorities, including FTA, when conducting hazard identification and risk analysis. Response: In an effort to provide clarity to the Safety Risk Management process, FTA has amended the terminology used in the final rule. A transit agency must develop a Safety Risk Management process that is comprised of three steps: (1) Safety hazard identification, (2) safety risk assessment, and (3) safety risk mitigation. A transit agency must first identify potential hazards throughout its system, and then it must analyze these hazards to determine whether they present safety risks and safety consequences. After a transit agency identifies and analyzes potential hazards and consequences, the agency must undertake activities to assess and prioritize the safety risk associated with the potential consequences of the identified safety hazards, in accordance with 49 CFR 673.25(c). This process includes an evaluation wherein the transit agency assigns a level of probability and severity to the consequences, and then develops mitigation, as necessary and appropriate. FTA encourages transit agencies to utilize computer software programs for safety risk assessment and mitigation, although smaller transit operators may not need them. FTA has taken efforts to avoid requiring prescriptive processes for hazard identification and risk analysis. FTA encourages transit agencies to review the U.S. Department of Defense’s Military Standard 882 (available at http://www.system-safety.org/ Documents/MIL-STD-882E.pdf) and utilize the hazard analytical methods and safety risk determination techniques, to the extent appropriate, but FTA is not mandating that transit agencies adopt any particular method of process for hazard identification and risk analysis—FTA is providing transit agencies with flexibility given the large range of sizes and types of operators nationwide. Finally, FTA will not specify the type of data and information that oversight authorities must share with transit agencies. Oversight authorities and transit agencies will need to make these decisions for themselves. 3. Safety Assurance 3.1. Safety Assurance: Safety Performance Monitoring and Measurement Comments: Pursuant to the proposed provisions at 49 CFR 673.27(b)(2), each operator of a public transportation system would be required to monitor its operations to identify any potential safety hazards not previously identified through the Safety Risk Management process outlined in proposed 49 CFR 673.27. One commenter suggested that FTA delete this requirement because, presumably, transit agencies already would have established activities to identify potential safety hazards as part of their Safety Risk Management processes. One commenter suggested deleting the word ‘‘any’’ in the requirement because the word suggests that safety risk mitigations may not exist and/or the transit agency’s Safety Risk Management Process is broken. One commenter asked what type of hazards might not be identified in the Safety Risk Management process and asked whether the proposed requirement indicates a flaw in the Safety Risk Management process. A couple of commenters requested clarification of the term ‘‘safety event’’ as used in proposed 49 CFR 673.27(b)(4). Specifically, a transit agency asked if a ‘‘safety event’’ in this provision is the same as ‘‘Event’’ as defined in the proposed rule. If the terms are the same, then the commenter asked whether a transit agency would have to develop a process for investigating ‘‘Accidents,’’ ‘‘Incidents,’’ and ‘‘Occurrences.’’ Additionally, the commenter asked to whom it should report a ‘‘safety event,’’ if anyone. Two commenters asserted that this aspect of SMS appears one-size-fits-all, perhaps appropriate for a large agency operating a rail system but burdensome for small-urban, rural, specialized, and VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34443 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations tribal transit agencies. Several commenters recommended that FTA should establish minimal monitoring requirements for Section 5310, Section 5311, and small Section 5307 recipients. These requirements should be scalable and reflect the size and scope of these organizations. Response: FTA appreciates the comments that it received regarding the Safety Assurance processes proposed in the NPRM. FTA agrees with the commenter who suggested that the requirement for transit agencies to continually monitor their operations to identify any potential safety hazards that it might not have captured when undertaking its Safety Risk Management process is a redundant requirement. FTA has eliminated this requirement for all transit operators in the final rule. Under the proposed provisions for Safety Assurance at 49 CFR 673.27(b)(4), a transit agency would be required to establish a process to: ‘‘Investigate safety events to identify causal factors.’’ FTA proposed the following definition for the word, ‘‘event,’’ as used throughout the rule: ‘‘Accident, Incident, or Occurrence.’’ Therefore, each transit agency must develop procedures for investigating Accidents, Incidents, and Occurrences. As discussed throughout this rulemaking, SMS is scalable, and FTA is providing transit agencies with great latitude and flexibility in developing procedures for investigating Events. For example, a small bus operator may develop a simple process for investigating the cause of a bus accident. The process may involve an on-site examination of the vehicle and the scene, a review of any video recordings from cameras mounted inside or outside of the bus, an interview with the bus operator and witnesses at the scene, and a toxicology test for the bus operator. A large rail operator may need to develop a more robust process for investigating the cause of a rail car accident, involving communications between safety and operating divisions of the transit agency, a shutdown of track operations, the deployment of designated safety inspectors and engineers, a comprehensive investigative report, etc. FTA is not prescribing any particular process for investigating safety events, but it notes that, as part of the larger safety management process, it is critical for transit agencies to identify and understand the causes of the Accidents, Incidents, and Occurrences in their systems so that the circumstances leading to the Events can be mitigated and prevented in the future. FTA notes that its reporting requirements for safety events are outlined in the National Transit Database Reporting Manuals (see https://www.transit.dot.gov/ntd). Rail transit agencies should follow the notification and reporting requirements of the new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674, including Appendix A to that rule. FTA is not requiring any reporting through this PTASP rule. Finally, FTA agrees with the commenters who recommended that FTA should establish minimal monitoring requirements for smaller transit operators. Consequently, in today’s final rule, FTA has eliminated many of the Safety Assurance requirements for all small public transportation providers. Small public transportation providers only would need to develop procedures for safety performance monitoring and measurement; they would not need to develop procedures for management of change and continuous improvement. FTA believes that these revisions reduce the administrative, financial, and regulatory burdens for small transit providers significantly and help them transition to the new part 673. Rail fixed guideway public transportation systems, and FTA recipients and subrecipients that operate more than 100 vehicles in peak revenue service, would be required to develop safety plans that include all of the processes under Safety Assurance, namely, safety performance monitoring and measurement, management of change, and continuous improvement. 3.2. Safety Assurance: Management of Change Comments: One commenter emphasized the importance of the proposed provisions at 49 CFR 673.27(c) involving the management of change and assessing changes that may introduce new hazards or impact a transit agency’s safety performance. This commenter suggested moving these requirements from the Safety Assurance provisions of the rule to the Safety Risk Management provisions of the rule, indicating that this relocation would elevate the importance of the requirement. One commenter requested clarification regarding which changes might impact a transit agency’s safety performance. Another commenter encouraged FTA to include Management of Change within the SMS context, stating that safety within the scope of capital projects, acquisitions, procurements, and system changes only fully can be measured and verified through system safety engineering practices and principles. This commenter argued that Management of Change within the context of SMS should include effective safety management procedures and processes to ensure that plans, policies, procedures, and practices effectively are measured and incorporated into an overall Management of Change program. One commenter expressed confusion over the provision for transit agencies to map updates of their safety plans to Safety Assurance instead of Safety Management Policy. Response: The Safety Assurance element of SMS involves the continual monitoring of a transit agency’s safety performance. Safety Assurance activities serve as a check on the Safety Risk Management of a transit agency. The procedures are designed to ensure that safety risk mitigations are effective, to collect safety performance data that will help a transit agency predict future safety events and mitigate or eliminate them, and to analyze the potential safety risks of any new practices or procedures adopted by a transit agency. For these reasons, the ‘‘Management of Change’’ activities are housed within Safety Assurance. Each transit agency must establish a process for identifying and assessing changes that may introduce new hazards or impact the transit agency’s safety performance, and if the transit agency determines that a change may impact its safety performance, then the transit agency must evaluate the proposed change through its Safety Risk Management process. FTA disagrees with the commenter who suggested that moving these procedures from Safety Assurance to Safety Risk Management will elevate their importance— ultimately, these all are requirements for safety plans. FTA is providing each transit agency with great latitude and flexibility in developing these procedures and identifying the types of changes in its system that could impact safety performance. These changes may include changes to the design of a new public transportation system, service changes to the existing public transportation system, new operational or maintenance procedures, new organizational changes, and changes to internal standard operating procedures, such as changes to procurement or safety management processes. Each of the SMS procedures are equally important and are designed to work together as a system for managing safety risks in a transit agency. In response to the commenter who encouraged FTA to include Management of Change within the SMS context, FTA makes clear that all of the activities within Safety Assurance— Safety Performance Monitoring, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34444 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations Management of Change, and Continuous Improvement—are core components of SMS. Finally, as noted above, under today’s final rule small public transportation providers are not subject to the management of change requirements under Safety Assurance. These requirements only apply to rail fixed guideway public transportation systems and FTA recipients and subrecipients that operate more than one hundred vehicles in peak revenue service. 3.3. Safety Assurance: Continuous Improvement Comments: One commenter sought clarification on the term ‘‘continuous improvement,’’ and another commenter recommended replacing the term ‘‘continuous’’ in proposed 49 CFR 673.27(d) with ‘‘continual’’ because ‘‘continuous’’ suggests no room to backslide. Additionally, the commenter suggested replacing the phrase, ‘‘If a transit agency identifies any deficiencies . . . , ’’ in proposed 49 CFR 673.27(d)(2) with the phrase, ‘‘When a transit agency . . . , ’’ to maintain consistency with the spirit of SMS. One commenter stated that transit agencies have developed practices for a variety of safety oversight programs to assess and ensure continuous improvement of safety performance. The commenter encouraged FTA to allow transit agencies to continue the development and execution of effective system safety oversight functions, such as safety audits, observations, inspections, assessments, and data analysis, in order to strengthen this component and work towards fully achieving the SMS model. Response: FTA notes the suggested changes to the verbiage in 49 CFR 673.27(d), but these suggestions are stylistic in nature, and offer no substantive amendments to the regulatory text. FTA appreciates the commenter who noted the various safety oversight programs that transit agencies have developed over the years to manage safety risk. FTA is providing transit agencies with great latitude and flexibility in developing procedures for managing safety risk, and through the requirements outlined in today’s rule, transit agencies should be developing procedures for conducting safety observations, inspections, assessments, and data analysis. FTA expects that the continual efforts tied to safety implementation will improve a transit system’s safety performance by reducing, mitigating, and preventing safety outcomes. Finally, as noted above, under today’s final rule small public transportation providers are not subject to continuous improvement requirements under Safety Assurance. These requirements only apply to rail fixed guideway public transportation systems and FTA recipients and subrecipients that operate more than one hundred vehicles in peak revenue service. 4. Safety Promotion Comments: Several commenters supported the establishment of a comprehensive safety training program, including refresher training, through the Safety Promotion element of SMS. Several commenters provided input on or asked questions about the types of employees who would be subject to training. A few commenters expressed concern with the phrase ‘‘directly responsible for the management of safety,’’ asserting that this language is vague and could be interpreted inconsistently. One commenter stated that FTA should replace this phrase with the terminology in FTA’s proposed Public Transportation Safety Certification Training Program rule at 49 CFR 672.13, which requires transit agencies to ‘‘designate its personnel who are directly responsible for safety oversight and ensure that they comply with the applicable training requirements.’’ Another commenter expressed concern that this phrase could be misinterpreted by transit agencies to imply that only management or safety department employees would be subject to a comprehensive safety training program. The commenter suggested that safety training should include all levels of employees at a transit agency and recommended that FTA change this language to cover all employees and contractors. One commenter, however, stated that transit agencies should not be required to train contractors. Another commenter suggested that the terminology used to describe categories of employees is not consistent with the terminology used in 49 CFR part 674, without qualification. Another commenter stated the rule should specify that the training program should apply to the Accountable Executive. Several commenters recommended that FTA not apply the training requirements to Section 5310 and Section 5311 operators, arguing that the development and implementation of a training program would be a financial and administrative burden. These commenters suggested that FTA should only mandate driver safety training for these operators. Another commenter indicated that live, face-to-face training is preferred, but noted that this type of training is difficult to schedule and suggested that FTA provide online training and host workshops for the industry. Several commenters requested additional clarification regarding the proposed training provisions. One commenter asked if FTA would ‘‘grandfather’’ in existing agency safety training programs. Another commenter asked what constitutes a ‘‘comprehensive safety training program’’ and whether FTA foresees any minimum requirements for this program. Another commenter asked whether FTA would provide further guidance on the specific types of safety training that it would require. One commenter believed that FTA’s intent is to create a single, comprehensive training program, but references to training throughout the rule make that unclear. One commenter suggested that Safety Promotion could include certifications and evaluations, including a driver report card and/or a professional transit driver program. Response: FTA appreciates the comments that it received supporting the safety training program. FTA emphasizes that this program is a statutory requirement under 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(G), which requires each operator of a public transportation system to establish ‘‘a comprehensive staff training program for the operations personnel and personnel directly responsible for safety’’ and includes ‘‘completion of a safety training program’’ and ‘‘continuing safety education and training.’’ Given the unique operating environments and operating systems of each transit agency, FTA is providing great latitude and flexibility in complying with these provisions. Each transit agency should determine for themselves the classes of employees who are directly responsible for safety in that unique system. These employees could include vehicle operators, maintenance staff, dispatchers, the Chief Safety Officer, the Accountable Executive, and other agency staff and management who have direct responsibility for safety. The training program should cover all levels of employees and contractors, and FTA disagrees with the commenter who suggested that these provisions should not apply to contractors. In many systems, contractors have direct responsibility for safety, particularly in circumstances where a transit agency contracts for service, and it is critical that these individuals have training in safety. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34445 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations In response to the commenters who recommended that FTA not apply the training requirements to Section 5310 and Section 5311 operators, FTA notes that it is deferring regulatory action regarding the applicability of this rule to these recipients and subrecipients until a later time. FTA is providing the industry with template safety plans and training courses, including online training courses, to assist small and large transit agencies with the development of training programs. In response to the question regarding whether FTA would ‘‘grandfather’’ in existing safety training programs, FTA does not find a need to do so. Certainly, transit agencies can use existing safety training programs, or augment those programs, so long as they meet the requirements in this rule. FTA is not issuing any prescriptive requirements regarding these training programs because it does not believe that a one- size-fits all approach is appropriate. FTA agrees with the commenter who suggested that Safety Promotion could include certifications and evaluations, including a driver report card and/or a professional transit driver program, although FTA is not requiring this type of documentation. Ultimately, each transit agency must determine what is best for its system. Finally, FTA agrees with the commenters who stated that the language in this section could be ‘‘misinterpreted by transit agencies to imply that only management or safety department employees would be subject to a comprehensive safety training program’’ and does intend to create confusion between today’s rule and the Safety Certification Training Program rule. Therefore, FTA is updating the language in 49 U.S.C. 673.29 to state: ‘‘A transit agency must establish and implement a comprehensive safety training program for all agency employees and contractors directly responsible for safety in the agency’s public transportation system.’’ 5. Scalability of SMS Comments: Many commenters requested guidance and technical assistance on how SMS could be scaled for small transit providers. One commenter urged FTA to keep guidance and templates at a high level so that they can be tailored to fit the unique needs and circumstances of the broad range of transit agencies subject to the PTASP rule. Several commenters stated that an appropriately scaled safety plan is particularly important in a zero fatality environment, and FTA should clarify that the transit agency, or the State, is responsible for deciding how to scale the plan. These commenters suggested that FTA revise 49 CFR 673.21 by replacing ‘‘appropriately scaled’’ with ‘‘appropriately scaled by the provider, or if applicable, the State.’’ One commenter urged FTA to emphasize in the final rule that SMS provides flexibility and adaptability, and it urged FTA to avoid developing prescriptive and restrictive standards for transit agencies that may create major program gaps and limitations. Similarly, another commenter stated that FTA should allow for local choice in implementing SMS plans and programs, asserting that local flexibility would lead to greater and more comprehensive safety plans across individual systems. Several commenters suggested that the rule lacks detail, and they indicated that FTA should add more detail to the various processes and procedures required, and that FTA should develop templates and associated technical assistance manuals where the requirements could be presented differently based on size, mode, and safety record. One commenter appreciated FTA’s efforts to create a rule that considers each transit agency’s uniqueness; however, this commenter concluded that the final rule should include identifiable and clearly stipulated requirements which can then be tailored to the individual characteristics of a transit agency. Response: FTA appreciates the comments that it received regarding the need for technical assistance, guidance, and templates for safety plans. Concurrent with this final rule, FTA is issuing a safety plan template for the industry. FTA is not requiring transit agencies to use the template, but rather, FTA is releasing it as a guide to assist States and transit agencies with the development of their safety plans. Ultimately, each operator of a public transportation system must decide for itself the processes and procedures within the SMS framework that are most appropriate for its unique operating environment. A small bus operator may have simpler processes and procedures than a large rail operator. In situations where a State is drafting a safety plan on behalf of a small public transportation provider, the State and the small public transportation provider should work together and collaborate on the development of processes and procedures that are most appropriate for the operator. FTA appreciates the comments noting the flexibility and adaptability of SMS, which FTA has emphasized throughout this rulemaking. FTA has taken great efforts to avoid the development of prescriptive and restrictive standards for transit agencies that may create major program gaps and limitations. Finally, FTA believes that the requirements in the rule satisfy the minimum requirements of the statute at 49 U.S.C. 5329(d), and if the requirements were any more prescriptive, transit agencies would not have the flexibility that they need to tailor their safety plans to their unique operating environments. If this were the case, the safety plans would be more difficult to develop, and ultimately, less useful in mitigating and preventing safety events. FTA believes that today’s rule strikes an appropriate balance in providing a general framework for safety plans and for allowing flexibility and scalability for each individual transit agency. 6. SMS and Safety Culture Comments: A few commenters emphasized the need for communication between management and agency staff, and they noted the need for a healthy safety culture. One commenter supported the requirement that transit agencies use SMS principles to help achieve a high level of safety, and noted that, to achieve a high level of safety, management at transit agencies must listen to and incorporate the input from their frontline workers and their unions who have daily, firsthand experiences and in-depth knowledge of the transit systems. One commenter acknowledged that training and communication are key components of an effective SMS, but also noted that listening to employees, seeking their feedback, and ensuring a positive culture of safety in their work are also important components of SMS. Another commenter stated that local unions may present administrative challenges in adopting a positive and healthy safety culture. Response: FTA appreciates the comments that it received regarding the need for a positive and healthy safety culture, and each of the requirements of this rule is designed to help ensure a positive safety culture at each transit agency. FTA wholeheartedly agrees that communication between management and staff, including labor unions, is critical in achieving a positive and healthy safety environment and in reducing safety events. One of the key requirements in today’s rule is an employee reporting program, which will allow the frontline staff who have in- depth knowledge of the transit system to report unsafe conditions to management without fear of reprisal. FTA believes that these programs will help support a positive safety culture within transit organizations. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34446 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations J. Safety Plan Documentation and Recordkeeping 1. Safety Plan Documentation Comments: Two commenters recommended that transit agencies should keep their safety plan documents for more than three years. One of these commenters recommended that transit agencies be required to retain documentation for a minimum of fifteen years, or at least five triennial review cycles. Another commenter asserted that the data contained in the safety plan documentation would be valuable in determining historical trends in a transit agency’s safety performance over time, so extending the minimum retention period would allow for more robust historical assessments. Response: FTA recognizes the value associated with having access to years of data to assist with assessing historical trends. However, such a requirement must be balanced against the costs associated with maintaining such data over an extended timeframe as suggested by the commenter. With that in mind, FTA believes its proposal that transit agencies maintain documents required by this part for a minimum of three years is reasonable relative to cost and effort, and also aligns well with the three year period for Triennial Reviews and State Management Reviews. This requirement would not bar those transit agencies desiring to maintain documents beyond three years from doing so, and FTA would encourage this practice. Accordingly, the proposed three year minimum requirement is included in the final rule. 2. Safety Plan Records Comments: Several commenters asked which records should be maintained related to training. One commenter asserted that employee training records under the Public Transportation Safety Training Certification Program are already stored in FTA’s training portal. Another commenter stated that its agency maintains a Learning Management System to schedule and track training, and this commenter questioned whether this existing system is sufficient or whether the agency will need to keep additional records. One commenter urged FTA to require transit agencies to maintain additional records beyond what is required in the proposed rule. One commenter requested clarification on whether the requirements to keep training records apply to locally operated transit systems. One commenter stated that it will maintain records on the SMS requirements for transit agencies that utilize a safety plan drafted by a State. Response: FTA notes that the training required under the Public Transportation Safety Certification Training Program at 49 CFR part 672 is required of those who are ‘‘directly responsible for safety oversight’’ of the public transit system. FTA has developed a web portal to maintain the training records for those subject to the requirements of that rule. Today’s final PTASP rule requires the development of a comprehensive staff training program for operations personnel and personnel who are ‘‘directly responsible for safety.’’ Thus, there are two different types of safety training requirements, applicable to different employees of a transit system. The requirements of today’s final rule include the completion of a safety training program and continuing safety education and training. Such training may or may not also include training requirements in accordance with the Public Transportation Safety Certification Training Program Rule at 49 CFR part 672. FTA emphasizes that each transit agency will have discretion and flexibility with regard to the requirements of the safety training program under this part. FTA encourages transit agencies to maintain training records to the maximum extent practicable, but in today’s final rule, FTA is not requiring transit agencies to maintain these records and it has removed Section 673.33 ‘‘Safety Plan Records’’ in its entirety for all transit agencies. Specifically, transit agencies are not required to maintain records of safety risk mitigations, results from safety performance assessments, and employee training. FTA believes that this revision from the NPRM to the final rule responds to the industry’s concerns regarding recordkeeping and it significantly will reduce the administrative and financial burdens for all transit operators. 3. Other Comments on Documentation and Recordkeeping Commenters: Numerous commenters stated that transit agencies need data protection for the information in their safety plans. The commenters argued that SMS, by its nature, requires full and open review, evaluation, and prioritization of risk, and the possibility that these safety reviews could be released through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), State sunshine laws, or obtained through judicial proceedings serve as a barrier to well- documented and robust self- examination. The commenters encouraged FTA to state its intent to protect agency analyses to the full extent possible and pursue full authority to exempt safety analyses from discovery and use in judicial proceedings. One commenter suggested that FTA incorporate a confidentiality provision into the rule similar to the provisions in the old SSO rule at 49 CFR part 659. One commenter suggested that the rule should acknowledge disclosure laws differ between States and that the rule should be written so that transit agencies are not required to disclose records to plaintiffs or allegedly injured parties if a State law does not require them to do so. Response: When FTA first promulgated its SSO rule in 1995, FTA recognized that rail transit agencies often face litigation arising from accidents, and that the release of accident investigation reports can compromise both the defense of litigation and the ability of agencies to obtain comprehensive, confidential analyses of accidents. Thus, the former SSO rule at 49 CFR 659.11 provided that a state ‘‘may withhold an investigation report that may have been prepared or adopted by the oversight agency from being admitted as evidence or used in a civil action for damages.’’ Courts are left to determine whether to admit investigation reports into evidence for litigation, in accordance with the relevant State law and the courts’ rules of evidence. Unlike NTSB accident reports, which cannot be admitted into evidence or used in civil litigation in a suit for damages arising from an accident, there is no such protection for data under FTA’s safety rules (see 49 U.S.C. 1154(b) regarding NTSB investigations). Rather, States may enact statutes regarding the admissibility into evidence of accident investigation reports or safety data and analysis conducted in compliance with FTA requirements. FTA emphasizes that any protections must be based on State, not Federal, law and rules of evidence. With regard to safety records in the possession of FTA, FTA will maintain the confidentiality of accident investigations and incident reports to the maximum extent permitted under Federal law, including the various exemptions under FOIA. Documents submitted to FTA are subject to FOIA and are generally releasable to the public upon request. However, unlike other Federal safety regulatory agencies such as FRA and FAA, Congress has yet to provide FTA with statutory authority to otherwise exempt safety-related information from disclosure. Section 3021 of the FAST Act authorized FTA to undertake a study to determine VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34447 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations whether data protection is necessary. FTA notes that its confidential treatment of information would not preempt State law; therefore, transit agencies still would be required to comply with their State’s laws regarding the treatment of such information and should exercise their use of this provision accordingly. 4. Database Systems Comments: One commenter expressed concern over integrating existing database systems and requested clarification from FTA on how to do so. The commenter urged FTA to clarify which data categories FTA expects to add to existing databases to capture information, and provide additional information on how it will support additional data management systems that agencies will need to acquire as a result of the rule. Response: Each transit agency will have to determine for itself how it will integrate databases. FTA supports the use of data management systems if a transit agency determines that these systems are necessary to manage safety risks. However, FTA does not foresee transit agencies having to integrate or create new databases, necessarily, in order to comply with the requirements of 49 CFR part 673. 5. Staffing and Resources as a Result of Documentation and Recordkeeping Comments: Two commenters expressed concern that the documentation and recordkeeping requirements in the proposed rule will produce a need for additional staffing and stretch already limited resources. The commenters stated that recordkeeping and documentation must be scalable. Response: FTA understands that agencies will need to expend resources to comply with the documentation requirements. FTA has sought to minimize the rule’s paperwork burdens and agrees that such requirements for documentation and recordkeeping must be scalable. To this end, FTA has eliminated many of its proposed recordkeeping requirements in their entirety. Specifically, transit agencies are not required to maintain records of safety risk mitigations, results from safety performance assessments, and employee training. FTA believes that this revision from the NPRM to the final rule responds to the industry’s concerns regarding recordkeeping and it significantly will reduce the administrative and financial burdens for all transit operators. FTA reiterates that service providers within the public transportation industry can vary greatly based on size, complexity, and operating characteristics. Transit agencies need safety processes, activities, and tools that scale to the size, complexity, and uniqueness of their systems, and SMS provides such an approach. Therefore, FTA believes that the documentation that is kept for a smaller bus agency may be less voluminous and less complex than those of large rail or multi-modal transit agencies. Moreover, FTA is issuing a safety plan template concurrent with the issuance of this final rule. This template will reduce the burden on transit agencies in developing the documentation necessary (that is, the safety plan) to comply with this rule. K. Funding Comments: Several commenters asserted that the proposed rule results in additional costs relating to, among other provisions, reviews, training, software or software upgrades, and the scalability and implementation of SMS. The commenters expressed concern that these additional costs may impact their limited available resources and expressed concern that no additional resources would be provided to support the costs of achieving compliance. Several commenters remarked that this rulemaking seems like an unfunded mandate. These commenters also asked whether there would be additional Federal resources provided to implement the new safety plans. Another commenter asserted that costs related to oversight responsibilities should be eligible for reimbursement by States. Response: FTA recognizes there are costs associated with implementing the requirements of this rule; however, this rule is a requirement of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d). FTA recognizes the need for increased investments in transit, but Congress determines the specific levels of funding available to FTA recipients. To this extent, FTA disagrees with those commenters who suggested that these requirements are an unfunded mandate. States and operators of public transportation systems may use Federal funding provided through the existing Section 5303, Section 5304, Section 5307, Section 5309, Section 5310, Section 5337, and Section 5339 programs to comply with the requirements in this rule, that is, developing and implementing their safety plans. Costs related to oversight by SSOAs are eligible for Federal reimbursement through the State Safety Oversight Grant Program created by 49 U.S.C. 5329. In an effort to further reduce the administrative, financial, and regulatory burdens on recipients, FTA will provide technical assistance in the form of templates and guidance documents to assist with the development of safety plans. FTA also is providing training courses to assist the industry with compliance with this rule. FTA has removed Section 673.33 ‘‘Safety Plan Records’’ from the final rule in response to comments from the industry and to reduce costs for individual transit systems. FTA is deferring action regarding the applicability of this rule to the smaller recipients and subrecipients that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds so that it can evaluate additional information and safety data to determine the appropriate level of regulatory burden necessary to address the safety risk presented by these operators. L. Staffing Comments: Several commenters expressed concerns about the limited staff of many transit agencies and asserted that compliance with the proposed rule, notably the administrative requirements, would require agencies to hire more staff, including contractors or expert consultants, thus increasing costs. One commenter expressed that medium- sized transit agencies may have difficulty absorbing the costs that may be necessary to hire more than one individual without additional funding. One commenter expressed concern that placing increasing requirements on State Department of Transportation staff could create unintended consequences, such as a reduction in work quality or causing staff to forego other critical work. Response: FTA understands the concerns expressed by some commenters about the staffing resources needed to comply with the rule. Irrespective of the Federal funding stream, FTA continues to believe the scalability and flexibility in safety plan development will not unduly burden any particular transit agency. Given the scalability of SMS, transit agencies may have to reorganize existing staffing resources instead of hiring additional ones. Moreover, to reduce staffing burdens on transit agencies and States, FTA is issuing a safety plan template concurrent with this final rule. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d), FTA also is requiring that States draft and certify plans on behalf of small public transportation providers which will further reduce the burden on smaller agencies. FTA is deferring action regarding the applicability of this rule to smaller recipients and subrecipients that only receive Section 5310 and/or VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34448 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations Section 5311 funds so that it can evaluate additional information and safety data to determine the appropriate level of regulatory burden necessary to address the safety risk presented by these operators. M. Enforcement and Oversight 1. Triennial Reviews and State Management Reviews Comments: A few commenters preferred FTA’s review of safety plans as part of the existing Triennial Review and State Management Review oversight processes, rather than annual reviews. One commenter asked FTA to provide more clarity on the State Management Review process. One commenter suggested that FTA could utilize findings from these oversight reviews for purposes of informing the transit industry on safety trends and best practices. A few commenters expressed concern that FTA may conduct oversight and enforcement of this rule outside of the traditional Triennial Review and State Management Review processes, but FTA did not explain how this additional oversight may impact transit agencies and SSOAs. The commenters recommended that FTA issue guidance explaining this additional oversight so that States, SSOAs, and transit agencies can effectively anticipate and respond to this process, and so that FTA may administer it consistently nationwide. Commenters suggested that FTA should detail procedures for additional reviews or audits outside the normal review schedule, including an advanced notice process and an identification of roles for the SSOAs. One commenter asked whether and to what extent reviewers could reject performance targets during the Triennial Review process. Another commenter asked about the consequences of a transit agency’s failure to meet its safety goals. Response: As a preliminary matter, pursuant to the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(D), each operator of a public transportation system is required to conduct an annual review and update of its safety plan. This annual review and update is a process to be undertaken by each transit agency independent of the triennial oversight process conducted by FTA. FTA will issue future guidance on any changes to the Triennial Review and State Management Review processes, including the role of an SSOA, to the extent necessary. FTA will not use the National Public Transportation Safety Plan to inform the industry how it will conduct the Triennial Review or State Management Review processes. FTA will conduct additional oversight and enforcement of this rule outside of the Triennial Review and State Management Review processes as necessary and appropriate. FTA notes that its new Public Transportation Safety Program rule at 49 CFR part 670 outlines its authority to conduct investigations, inspections, audits, and examinations on transit systems. FTA will make oversight and enforcement determinations on a case-by-case basis. Finally, FTA Triennial and State Management reviewers will not ‘‘reject’’ a transit agency’s safety performance targets; however, they will ensure that each transit agency has identified safety performance targets based on the safety performance measures established in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. To the extent that a transit agency does not meet its safety goals, then using its safety plan as guide, the transit agency must determine for itself which efforts it must undertake to do so. 2. State Oversight Comments: One commenter stated that a State may reasonably be required to provide oversight in drafting a safety plans, but for some States with multiple responsibilities and multiple recipients and subrecipients of Section 5310 and Section 5311 funds, the additional responsibility of oversight of small Section 5307 operators could be daunting. One commenter remarked that incorporating oversight of public transit systems into the existing SSO program would require additional trained personnel. Response: As discussed above, FTA is not requiring States to provide oversight of safety plans. States only are required to draft and certify the safety plans on behalf of small Section 5307 operators (unless the operator decides to draft and certify its own safety plan). FTA is responsible for providing oversight and enforcement of all safety plans, and it will utilize the existing Triennial Review and State Management Review processes to do so (with the exception of SSOAs, which have primary safety oversight and enforcement responsibility over rail transit systems). To ease the burden on States, FTA is issuing a safety plan template with this final rule. Also, as discussed above, there is no Federal legal authority for an SSOA to provide safety oversight of a bus system, and this rule does not contemplate an SSOA taking on that role. 3. Other Comments Comments: One commenter encouraged FTA to provide standard thresholds that it would use to determine the need for a safety audit, this way, FTA would not appear to be arbitrary or inconsistent. This commenter also recommended that FTA provide each transit agency with the opportunity to answer questions and provide additional information to assist safety oversight reviewers. One commenter asked if FTA would analyze the public’s role in collisions rather than concentrating its oversight on transit agencies, arguing that, without addressing the public’s interaction with the transit system, transit agencies may risk Federal funding if they do not meet their safety performance targets. Additionally, the commenter asked if FTA would have funding available for purposes of education (internal and external to include educating the public on safety), engineering (highway and vehicle designs), and enforcement if a transit agency fails to meet its safety performance targets. Response: Through MAP–21 and the FAST Act, Congress provided FTA with significant authority to conduct oversight, inspections, investigations, audits, examinations, and testing, as well as enforcement actions. (49 U.S.C. 5329(f)–(g)). FTA has issued a new regulation at 49 CFR part 670 entitled the ‘‘Public Transportation Safety Program’’ rule. FTA directs readers to that rulemaking for issues related to safety audits conducted by FTA. FTA has identified NTD reporting thresholds for an ‘‘Incident,’’ and those thresholds can be found in Appendix A to FTA’s new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674 (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR- 2016-03-16/pdf/2016-05489.pdf). These thresholds do not limit FTA’s authority to conduct a safety audit in the case of an Incident. FTA notes that the statutory framework of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d) authorizes FTA to regulate operators of public transportation systems, not the riding public. Nevertheless, through the SMS framework, each transit operator is required to develop processes and procedures for addressing safety risks in all aspects of their systems, and therefore, they must consider the public’s role and interaction with their systems when identifying hazards and evaluating risks. Finally, as discussed throughout this final rule, FTA does not have control over its annual funding levels and appropriations. However, FTA supports the use of Federal funding for purposes VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34449 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations of education, engineering, and enforcement activities, and these types of activities may fall within the scope of eligibility for various funding programs under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53. N. NTD Reporting Comments: One commenter recommended that FTA continue collecting additional safety reporting data through existing programs such as the NTD, which is currently used by transit agencies to report safety incidents. Another commenter remarked that 49 CFR part 673 does not discuss reporting to FTA through NTD. Additionally, the commenter asked if FTA intends to substantially change the NTD reporting requirements upon the effective date of the proposed PTASP rule. Response: During this rulemaking, FTA issued a ‘‘Notice of Request for Comments on Updates to National Transit Database Safety Information Collection’’ (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ pkg/FR-2014-08-21/pdf/2014- 19787.pdf). FTA issued a ‘‘Supplemental Notice and Response to Comments on National Transit Database’’ (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ pkg/FR-2015-11-18/pdf/2015- 29384.pdf). FTA issued final reporting requirements on July 26, 2016, and they are available here: https://www.gpo.gov/ fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-07-26/pdf/2016- 17075.pdf. Through today’s final rule, FTA is not requiring any reporting of any information to any entity. O. Security Comments: Several commenters expressed concerns that the proposed rule did not address security, including terrorism, trespassing, vandalism, assaults, robberies, and cyber threats on transit systems. One commenter suggested that FTA address security and safety of the general public in this rule. One commenter stated that the TSA is unable to establish cybersecurity requirements for transit control systems due to lack of funding and expertise. This commenter warned that the U.S. Department of Transportation’s focus on transportation safety must include an emphasis on transportation control system security to guarantee the safety of associated transportation systems. One commenter stated that FTA should provide direction regarding security and terrorism preparedness, noting that these preparations should be coordinated with TSA. Response: As a preliminary matter, TSA has the prerogative and responsibility for all rulemakings on security in public transportation. Specifically, under the Implementing the Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110– 53), the September 2004 Memorandum of Agreement between DOT and DHS, and the September 2005 modal annex between FTA and TSA, DHS is tasked with the responsibility for carrying out a national strategy for public transportation security to minimize security threats and to maximize the ability of public transportation agencies to mitigate damage from terrorist attacks and other major incidents. While this legislation and these agreements do not preclude transit agencies from implementing measures securing their assets, FTA is not requiring agencies to do so through this final rule. FTA recognizes, of course, that some of the steps that a transit agency takes to ensure the personal safety and security of its riders and employees will overlap with steps it takes to secure its system from a terrorist attack; for example, the steps an agency takes may be part of a threat and vulnerability assessment. FTA notes that a transit agency’s expenses for safety and security will continue to be eligible for Federal reimbursement under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53. P. SSPP–PTASP Crosswalk Comments: Although not a part of the PTASP NPRM, several commenters provided input on FTA’s ‘‘Crosswalk Matrix: 49 CFR part 659.19 System Safety Program Plan Requirements with Proposed Requirements for Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans,’’ which it uploaded onto the docket for this rule. FTA intended this document to provide additional guidance to rail transit systems as to how the 21 elements of an SSPP would fit within the new regulatory requirements for a PTASP. Several commenters expressed concerns that the crosswalk lumps some SSPP elements into a few categories for PTASPs, and these commenters asserted that the six most complicated SSPP elements are listed under multiple pillars of SMS. A few commenters asserted that some of the 21 elements of SSPPs fit into other pillars of SMS. One commenter encouraged FTA to work with rail transit systems to better align this matrix and promote a better understanding of SMS. One commenter suggested that performance targets should be listed under Safety Assurance, rather than Safety Management Policy. Another commenter provided several detailed suggestions for revised mapping of the SSPP elements with SMS. Response: FTA agrees that the new PTASP places the former elements of SSPPs into fewer categories, and this is a result of a new statutory framework under 49 U.S.C. 5329. The statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d) provide specific requirements for PTASPs, and through the design of the new PTASP rule, FTA’s intent is to ensure that rail transit systems will not become less safe than they were under the former SSO rule at 49 CFR part 659. Additional, more comprehensive guidance regarding the relationship between SSPPs and PTASPs is forthcoming, and FTA will post that guidance on its website (see https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations- and-guidance/safety/transit-safety- oversight-tso). FTA agrees that some of the SSPP elements may be listed under multiple elements of SMS, but FTA believes that this mapping most appropriately connects the PTASP requirements to former SSPP elements. FTA disagrees that safety performance targets should be included under Safety Assurance, rather than Safety Management Policy because safety performance targets guide the safety management decisions, investment decisions, and policy decisions of a transit agency, all critical tenets of Safety Management Policy. Notwithstanding this connection between the former SSPPs and PTASPs, FTA only is requiring transit agencies to set safety performance targets as part of the ‘‘General Requirements’’ section of this final rule (49 CFR 673.11(a)((3)); to avoid redundancy, FTA is not also establishing this requirement in the ‘‘Safety Management Policy’’ section, although, transit agencies may include safety performance targets in their Safety Management Policies if they so choose. Q. Safety Performance Measures Comments: Several commenters urged FTA to revise the performance measures proposed in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. Multiple commenters urged FTA to delete the proposed ‘‘reliability’’ performance criterion for the following reasons: Transit agencies currently do not report reliability data to NTD; the reliability performance measure is redundant of the TAM rule; reliability is a maintenance-related measure, not a safety measure; reliability is not easily quantified; and reliability could vary considerably between transit agencies. One commenter sought further guidance regarding FTA’s four proposed safety performance measures. This commenter suggested that without additional detail, transit agencies would not be able to determine the standards by which FTA and SSOAs would measure and evaluate the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34450 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations appropriateness of the safety performance targets established by the agencies. Response: FTA appreciates the comments that it received regarding safety performance measures; however, FTA notes that today’s rule does not establish safety performance measures— FTA’s National Public Transportation Safety Plan establishes the measures. FTA is addressing comments regarding the safety performance measures in the notice and comment process for the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. R. Technical Assistance and Guidance Comments: Numerous commenters supported FTA’s proposal to issue a safety plan template and to provide technical assistance to industry on the development and implementation of safety plans, particularly to address the scalability of SMS to different transit modes and system sizes. Some commenters stated that FTA should allow transit agencies to attach an appendix to the safety plan template, which would allow a State to avoid drafting multiple unique plans and capture a few unique issues. Several commenters stated that FTA clearly should allow a State to draft a template statewide safety plan or a series of individual safety plans tailored for each unique transit agency. One commenter stated that a transit agency should have the ability to tailor guidance and templates to its own needs, as long as it satisfies the substantive requirements of the final PTASP rule. Another commenter stated that it was looking forward to receiving implementation and gap analysis checklists. Several commenters noted that there is no mandated timeframe for when FTA will provide technical assistance tools and urged FTA to provide them in a timely manner. Several commenters urged FTA to make PTASP templates available in advance of any implementation deadline; some commenters urged FTA to make PTASP templates available concurrently with this final rule. One commenter suggested that, if FTA is unable to provide PTASP templates on the day that the final rule is published, then FTA should change the implementation deadline to be one year from the date that FTA issues PTASP templates. Another commenter stated that FTA should refrain from issuing a final rule until FTA develops guidance and PTASP templates. One commenter recommended that FTA provide technical assistance tools to States upon request. Several commenters requested other forms of technical assistance, including an FTA-sponsored website featuring national-level safety performance measurement data, online training, safety workshops, examples of industry best practices, and lessons learned in implementing SMS. Response: FTA appreciates the support from commenters regarding its development of a safety plan template and other guidance and technical assistance. FTA recognizes the administrative and financial burdens that this rule may impose on the industry, and FTA intends to reduce these burdens through templates, guidance, and technical assistance. Ultimately, the safety plan template, guidance, and technical assistance will help reduce, mitigate, and eliminate hazards and risks and will help make public transportation safer. For these reasons, today, FTA is issuing a template for safety plans concurrent with the issuance of this rule. The safety plan template is generic, minimalistic, and addresses each of the requirements of today’s final rule. States and transit agencies can tailor the template to meet the needs of the numerous unique operating environments across the nation. FTA is providing deference to States in the development of plans on behalf of operators of public transportation. A State may draft a single statewide safety plan, it may draft a unique safety plan for each individual transit operator, it may develop a generic statewide safety plan with a more tailored appendix outlining various processes and procedures for each unique transit operator, or it may develop another method for complying with the rule, so long as the statewide plan or the individualized plans satisfy each of the elements of this rule and contain each of the required processes and procedures for SMS. Transit agencies are free to tailor guidance and templates to meet their own needs, so long as their safety plans satisfy the requirements of this rule. If a State drafts a statewide safety plan, then each individual operator that it covers should keep its plan on file, and the plan should include the relevant and unique information for that particular operator, such as the names of the Accountable Executive and Chief Safety Officer and the operator’s safety performance targets. FTA notes that it has been developing a website through which it has been providing technical assistance, including information related to safety performance, training, examples of industry best practices, and lessons learned in implementing SMS. The website is located at the following link: https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations- and-guidance/safety/transit-safety- oversight-tso. FTA has been uploading information onto this website, including guidance and other forms of technical assistance, as it becomes available. FTA encourages the transit industry to utilize the tools on this website with its development and implementation of successful safety practices, and it also encourages the industry to provide feedback on this website, as it evolves, through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ tool at the following link: https:// ftawebprod.fta.dot.gov/ContactUsTool/ Public/NewRequest.aspx. Finally, as mentioned above, in an effort to assist the industry with meeting the requirements of this rule, FTA is making the effective date one year after its publication date. As a result, transit agencies will have a total of two years from the publication date to certify that they have safety plans meeting the requirements of 49 CFR part 673. S. Coordination With Other Entities Comments: Two commenters expressed concern with the potential for inconsistency and duplication between FTA and FRA safety regulations. One commenter urged FTA to coordinate its NTD with FRA’s Accident/Incident Report Generator.NET (AIRGNET) to establish consistent terminology, reporting requirements, audit requirements, training requirements, and safety plan requirements. One commenter recommended that FTA adopt safety standards and methodologies developed by the U.S. Department of Defense, including system safety analytical methods to assess hazards and consequences and system safety engineering principles and techniques to develop and design mitigation. Two commenters encouraged FTA to establish an advisory committee of transit operators to assist with the development of policies and procedures for smaller operators. Response: FTA makes clear through today’s rule that transit agencies that operate a rail fixed guideway public transportation system subject to regulation by FRA do not have to develop safety plans for that mode of service. 49 CFR 673.11(f). FTA does not intend to issue safety regulations that conflict or are inconsistent with FRA’s safety regulations, and to that end, FTA has coordinated and will continue to coordinate with FRA on the development and implementation of this rule. FTA also has taken great efforts to ensure that terminology, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34451 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations definitions, reporting requirements, training requirements, and regulatory enforcement efforts are consistent with other Federal safety and reporting regulations to the maximum extent possible. FTA appreciates the suggestion that it should adopt safety standards and methodologies developed by the U.S. Department of Defense, including system safety analytical methods to assess hazards and consequences and system safety engineering principles and techniques to develop and design mitigations; FTA is adopting the SMS approach to addressing safety risk, which is consistent with the approach taken by other modes within the U.S. Department of Transportation. Finally, as FTA develops and issues guidance and best practices for safety, FTA intends to consult with the transit industry, including the Transit Advisory Committee for Safety, to the maximum extent practicable. T. Nexus Between the PTASP Rule and Other FTA Requirements Comments: Numerous commenters suggested that FTA clarify the nexus between the PTASP rule and other related FTA requirements, specifically, the National Public Transportation Safety Plan, the SSO rule, the Safety Certification Training Program rule, the Bus Testing rule, and the Transit Asset Management rule. These commenters recommended that FTA clearly define the link between the PTASP rule and other FTA requirements, especially the Transit Asset Management rule, to be consistent to avoid conflicting regulations. One commenter recommended that, to foster a strong culture of safety, FTA should extend data protection to asset management analyses. One commenter urged FTA to reinforce the link between the PTASP rule and the SSO rule, arguing that FTA should work to strengthen and streamline the mitigation, reporting, and notification processes. Response: FTA appreciates the comments that it received regarding the connection between the PTASP rule and other related FTA regulations. With respect to the National Public Transportation Safety Plan, FTA emphasizes that the Plan establishes safety performance measures to which each operator of a public transportation system must set performance targets in their safety plans, as required in the PTASP rule. In the SSO rule, FTA requires each SSOA to develop a program standard which, among other things, establishes minimum safety standards for the safety of all rail fixed guideway public transportation systems within its jurisdiction. FTA also requires each SSOA to approve the PTASP of every rail fixed guideway public transportation system within its jurisdiction. Each SSOA should review those safety plans to ensure that they are compliant with the PTASP rule, the National Public Transportation Safety Plan, and its own program standard. FTA notes that the PTASP rule does not add any additional notification or reporting requirements; those requirements are outlined in the SSO rule and the NTD Reporting Manuals. In the Safety Certification Training Program rule, FTA establishes minimum training requirements for transit agency employees and contractors who are directly responsible for safety oversight of rail fixed guideway public transportation systems that receive FTA funds. In the PTASP rule, FTA requires each operator of a public transportation system to establish a comprehensive safety training program for all employees and contractors directly responsible for safety. In this section of the safety plan, a rail transit system also may include its training program for employees and contractors who are directly responsible for safety oversight. In the Bus Testing rule, FTA requires recipients of FTA funds to test buses to ensure that they meet minimum performance standards, a scoring system, and a pass/fail threshold if they are using FTA funds to procure the buses. This rule exists separate and apart from the PTASP rule, but transit agencies may incorporate by reference into their safety plans any processes and procedures that they utilize for bus testing pursuant to the Bus Testing rule. Finally, in the Transit Asset Management rule, FTA requires transit agencies to conduct asset inventories and then perform condition assessments on their assets. Those condition assessments should inform the SMS activities that a transit agency undertakes pursuant to its safety plan. To illustrate how these rules work together, if a transit agency finds through a condition assessment that an asset is not meeting its state of good repair standards, then the transit agency may conduct safety hazard identification and safety risk assessment analysis on that asset. The transit agency may mitigate any safety risks, as necessary, and it may reprioritize its capital plan in accordance with the FTA and FHWA Planning rule at 23 CFR part 450. FTA notes that it addressed any comments related to asset management in the final Transit Asset Management rule. U. Americans With Disabilities Act Issues Comments: One commenter stated that the proposed rule should not conflict with the Americans with Disabilities Act laws and regulations, and vice-versa. The commenter urged FTA to clarify how it will treat safety issues and incidents that may conflict with ADA requirements, remarking that agencies should not be subject to inspections, audits, examinations, investigations, directives, or other possible sanctions for adhering to ADA requirements. Response: FTA does not intend the PTASP rule to conflict with the ADA and its implementing regulations, which are designed to prevent and eliminate discrimination. Nevertheless, to the extent that a transit agency is undertaking action to comply with the ADA—such as the construction of capital projects to make facilities ADA- compliant; the installation of accessible features on vehicles, platforms, and other transit facilities; and the provision of paratransit service—FTA expects that action to be undertaken safely and in accordance with this final rule and a transit agency’s safety plan. V. Other Comments on the Rule Comments: One commenter suggested that all transit agencies should have safety plans only for maintenance and training, and that States should review safety plans only if a transit agency has safety issues. One commenter encouraged FTA to incorporate occupational health issues into the rule, focusing on driver assault, restroom breaks, and fatigue management. Another commenter encouraged FTA to join a ‘‘Journey to Safety Excellence—a cycle of improvement that aims for a continuous reduction of risk with a goal of zero harm,’’ stating that integrating the principles of the ‘‘Journey to Safety Excellence’’ into workplace safety strategies can make a great difference in saving lives and preventing injuries. One commenter remarked that zero is the only goal that transit agencies should establish in their performance targets. A commenter expressed disapproval for the guidelines FRA developed for rail vehicle crashworthiness, citing the Union International des Chemins de Fers (UIC), an international rail regulatory body, as an alternative example. This commenter urged FTA to use UIC as an example and expressed hope that FTA can serve as a role model for FRA. Response: FTA disagrees with the commenter who suggested that all VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34452 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations transit agencies should have safety plans only for maintenance and training, and that States should review safety plans only if a transit agency has safety issues. FTA’s authorizing statute at 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(B) mandates that each operator of a public transportation system establish ‘‘methods for identifying and evaluating safety risks throughout all elements of the public transportation system.’’ This requirement would extend beyond mere maintenance and training, and in this final rule, FTA makes clear that transit agencies should address safety risks in all aspects of their systems, including maintenance, training, operations, construction of new facilities, rehabilitation of existing facilities, etc. Moreover, the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d) require States to ‘‘draft’’ and ‘‘certify’’ safety plans on behalf of small Section 5307 operators. States cannot merely review plans if one of these transit agencies has ‘‘safety issues.’’ FTA appreciates the comment that it received regarding occupational health issues. To the extent that occupational health issues may be safety hazards and present safety risks, transit agencies should be addressing them through the SMS processes outlined in their safety plans. FTA will issue rules regarding operator assault in the future. Regarding the establishment of ‘‘zero’’ as the only feasible goal in performance targets, FTA only is creating safety performance measures by which transit agencies are to set performance targets. FTA is not mandating any particular goal or target; it is deferring to each transit agency, MPO, and State and to set targets for each of their unique systems and geographical areas. Finally, FTA notes that this final PTASP rule does not establish guidelines for rail vehicle crashworthiness. Please see the National Public Transportation Safety Plan, available on FTA’s website, for more information regarding safety performance standards for public transportation vehicles. W. Regulatory Impact Analyses 1. Costs Comments: One commenter concluded that FTA underestimated the costs associated with the implementation of the rule. Similarly, a transit agency estimated cost increases to ensure compliance with the rule. Several commenters provided specific cost estimates related to the proposed requirements. One commenter remarked that upgrading its surveillance system on buses would cost approximately $2 million and that it installed driver barriers in 30 new buses, at a cost of $4,202 per barrier, totaling $126,060. This commenter stated that the additional recordkeeping could require the purchase of new equipment and tracking software and the hiring and training of additional staff, which would result in costs of at least $4 million. This commenter asserted that staffing at the administrative level would cost about $85,000 annually and contractor personnel would cost about $75,000 annually. This commenter asserted that training for administrative staff would cost about $30,000 per person, and training for contractor personnel would cost about $10,000 per person. One commenter estimated that it would cost a State $200,000 annually to adequately perform any oversight responsibilities. One commenter estimated that its initial investment could reach at least $1 million for a risk management information system, training, and personnel. One commenter stated that it could not estimate the cost of coordination with MPOs on the establishment of performance targets. Response: FTA appreciates the comments on the costs of the proposed rule. It is a challenge to develop cost estimates for the rule that can be representative of any one agency given the differences in agency size, modes, location, and level of maturity of safety programs. The regulatory analysis acknowledges that mitigation costs of identified risks are not included in the estimated cost of the proposed rule. The cost of onboard surveillance systems and driver barriers are mitigation costs. Typically, a transit agency makes these types of investment decisions with the understanding that there will be benefits of the mitigation that exceed the costs of the mitigation. Today’s rule does not recommend any specific mitigation, and does not require agencies to implement mitigations that have greater costs than benefits. The annual personnel costs of recordkeeping cited by the commenter are considerably higher than the estimated cost in the proposed rule. FTA’s cost estimate for this particular type of agency is $20,000 for staff; $15,000 for information technology; and $4,000 for training, excluding travel costs. FTA cannot estimate costs for specific agencies, since FTA does not know how these costs would vary by size within each category. The larger the agency, the greater the amount of data and records that need to be maintained, with the possibility of significant economies of scale for certain recordkeeping tasks, but increased complexity in others, possibly requiring more sophisticated systems than those of the smaller agencies. It is possible that a large transit agency may need one additional full time staff and a contractor (at a total cost of $160,000 per year) to maintain records. Most likely, these individuals would be performing other duties. It also is possible that the initial set up costs may be higher for those who may not have the expertise in this area. FTA does not anticipate that these costs will be continual. Therefore, while FTA accepts that the cost estimates in the NPRM may be low for some agencies, FTA does not believe that the costs would be as high as suggested by the commenter and continuous into the future. The commenter’s estimated cost of $200,000 for ‘‘oversight’’ is significantly higher than FTA’s estimated total State cost estimate of $18,000. FTA emphasizes it is not requiring States to conduct safety oversight through this rule; FTA is only requiring States to draft and certify safety plans on behalf of particular operators of public transportation systems. Moreover, with today’s rule, FTA is providing a safety plan template which significantly will reduce costs to States and operators, particularly for the smaller operators. Therefore, FTA believes that the commenter overestimated the costs significantly. The commenter’s $1 million estimate for a risk management information system and associated staff may not be unreasonable. FTA estimates annual costs in the range of $15,000 to $20,000 for information technology systems for rail transit agencies and for large bus operators that receive Section 5307 funds. FTA estimates additional staff costs for risk assessment and assurance activities of approximately $60,000 per year for large Section 5307 operators. These costs would total $1 million over a span of thirteen years, at which time information technology systems may need to be updated. It is possible that the costs would be higher during the initial years and significantly reduced in subsequent years. Also, it is possible that the information technology system will be used for multiple tasks, some of which may not be related to this rule. 2. Benefits Comments: One commenter questioned what benefit, if any, would be achieved from the rule if FTA is unable to provide evidence to show that the implementation of the rule would increase safety and reduce transit incidents. The commenter asserted that it seems unreasonable to require an ‘‘economically significant’’ expenditure of limited transit agency funds when VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34453 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations funds should be used for state of good repair and transit asset management needs. Another commenter concluded that FTA is premature in estimating economic benefits through the Regulatory Impact Analysis before this rulemaking is effective and implemented. One commenter stated that a positive return on investment (ROI) may not be possible without adequate resources, and this commenter asserted that the NPRM does not specify whether an ROI would exceed a break-even point. The commenter asked to review actual results of implementing SMS to help justify the anticipated level of investment, suggesting that SMS should be piloted in a few transit agencies before being implemented nationally. Response: As discussed in other sections of this rule and as discussed in more detail below, today’s regulatory provisions are required by statute under 49 U.S.C. 5329(d), and FTA is implementing SMS in the least prescriptive way possible. Safety Management Policy is the foundation of the organization’s SMS. The safety management policy statement clearly states the organization’s safety objectives and sets forth the policies, procedures, and organizational structures necessary to accomplish the safety objectives. It clearly delineates management and employee responsibilities for safety throughout the organization. It also ensures that management is actively engaged in the oversight of the organization’s safety performance by requiring regular review of the safety policy by a designated Accountable Executive (general manager, president, or other person with similar authority). Within the context of the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan, an organization’s safety objectives will be articulated through the setting of performance targets based on, at a minimum, the safety performance measures established in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. See 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(E). Pursuant to the statutory requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(B) and (C), each agency’s Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan must include ‘‘methods for identifying and evaluating safety risks throughout all elements of the public transportation system,’’ and ‘‘strategies to minimize the exposure of the public, personnel, and property to hazards and unsafe conditions.’’ Each of these requirements is consistent with the second component of SMS—Safety Risk Management—which requires the development of processes and activities to help the organization better identify hazards associated with its operational systems. Once identified, a transit agency must evaluate the safety risk associated with the potential consequences of these hazards, and then institute mitigations, as necessary, to control the consequences or minimize the safety risk. The statutory requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(B), (C), and (D)— ‘‘methods for identifying and evaluating safety risks throughout all elements of the public transportation system,’’ ‘‘strategies to minimize the exposure of the public, personnel, and property to hazards and unsafe conditions,’’ and ‘‘a process and timeline for conducting an annual review and update of the safety plan’’—encompass the requirements of the third component of SMS: Safety Assurance. Safety Assurance requires an organization to monitor its safety performance, and it is designed to ensure that the organization meets or exceeds its safety objectives through the collection, analysis, and assessment of data. Through regular reviews and updates of its safety plan, a transit agency would evaluate changes to its operations that might introduce new safety risks. If a transit agency identifies safety risks through its safety performance assessments, then it must take action to correct any safety deficiencies. All of these efforts are intended to minimize the exposure of the public, personnel, and property to safety hazards and unsafe conditions. To minimize administrative, financial, and regulatory burdens under Safety Assurance, FTA has reduced requirements for small public transportation providers and has developed a minimal set of Safety Assurance provisions under 49 CFR 673.27. The fourth component of SMS— Safety Promotion—involves the training, awareness, and communication that support safety. The training aspect of SMS is consistent with the statutory requirement of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(G) for a comprehensive staff training program for operations personnel and personnel directly responsible for safety. FTA is intending to implement 49 U.S.C. 5329(d) in the least prescriptive way possible by designing minimalistic regulatory requirements that mirror the relevant statutory provisions. By utilizing SMS in the regulatory framework, transit operators of varying sizes, complexities, and operating characteristics can build safety plans that are flexible and scalable to meet their unique safety needs. Through its scalability, SMS helps reduce the costs and burdens associated with developing and implementing safety plans. Also, as noted above, FTA eliminated several significant Safety Assurance requirements for small public transportation providers in this final rule. While FTA is unable to provide definitive evidence that the implementation of this rule would increase safety by reducing incidence of safety events, FTA fully anticipates that safety benefits will be realized if this rule is implemented. By adopting a systematic approach to safety through the development of the safety plan and the practice of SMS, transit agencies are expected to reduce the risk and probability of safety incidents. FTA expects that a proactive approach to managing safety risks is more effective than a reactive approach. The SMS approach to safety, which involves collecting data, predicting and mitigating future safety events, training, accountability, and open communication will reduce safety events and improve safety outcomes in the future. Indeed, state of good repair investments could prevent and mitigate future safety events. FTA currently is conducting an SMS pilot program at a large multi-modal transit agency and is planning to implement two additional pilot programs for bus agencies to better understand how a transit agency would implement SMS. The results of these pilot programs will help inform FTA’s efforts to provide guidance to the industry on SMS implementation. FTA notes that the benefits of SMS implementation may take years to be realized, and in turn, taking time for the benefits of SMS to be fully estimated and quantified. In light of various public comments, FTA is deferring regulatory action regarding the applicability of this rule to operators of public transportation systems that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds. FTA is deferring action pending further evaluation of additional information and safety data related to these operators to determine the appropriate level of regulatory burden necessary to address the safety risk presented by these operators. Six years after the compliance date for this rule, FTA plans to prepare a report evaluating the benefits and effectiveness of the regulatory framework provided by this rule. In this report, FTA plans to utilize the results of the pilot program and information gathered from oversight reviews, which will include an evaluation of the flexibility and scalability of the SMS framework in developing and implementing safety VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34454 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations plans. The results in this report will be made available for public comment to help inform any future amendments that may be needed to the regulatory framework that improves the PTASP process and furthers the goal of public transportation safety. 3. Regulatory Flexibility Act Comments: Several commenters provided input on the rule’s impact to small entities. Several commenters asserted that small to medium sized transit agencies face budget constraints and expressed concern that these agencies may need to hire additional staff to comply with the rule or reduce transit service. Several commenters expressed concern that FTA crafted the NPRM with only rail transit systems in mind. One commenter stated that the excellent safety record of rural transit systems warrants a limited approach to Federal safety regulation regarding rural bus systems, which would enable operators to focus scarce resources on safely delivering transit services, not on regulatory compliance. The commenter warned that if FTA does not tailor the rule to small transit systems, then many small bus operators would have to shift funds and personnel from the actual delivery of service to compliance with safety rules. The commenter asserted that MAP–21 reduced the portion of Section 5311 funds available for program administration from 15 percent to 10 percent. The commenter noted that, in Senate Report 3638, the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs indicated its intent that FTA take a ‘‘measured approach,’’ and not a ‘‘one size fits all’’ approach, to safety. One commenter stated that FTA’s Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis is somewhat misleading, particularly where tribal governments are concerned. Due to the modest amount of funding available to tribes, the commenter concluded that the cost associated with developing a safety plan for tribal governments is much higher than FTA’s estimate of 0.5 to 1.5 percent; the commenter asserted that the costs are closer to 5.5 to 15.5 percent. Response: FTA has taken significant efforts to reduce the burden on small transit agencies. For small Section 5307 operators, FTA is requiring States to draft and certify their safety plans. FTA designed the requirements of today’s rule, particularly the SMS requirements, to be scalable, flexible, and not prescriptive for small transit operators. Moreover, FTA developed a safety plan template for small operators to assist them with the development of their plans. FTA is offering live and online training to small transit operators, and it is offering any technical assistance that might be needed. FTA notes that many small transit agencies already have processes and procedures in place that comply with the requirements of today’s rule, and given the safety record of many smaller operators, significant mitigation may not be necessary. FTA emphasizes that the statutory requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5329 make the rule applicable to any operator of a public transportation system, and small operators are not excluded from the rule. To accommodate small public transportation providers and to reduce their administrative, financial, and regulatory burdens, FTA made significant changes to its proposed regulatory framework in the NPRM. FTA eliminated a Safety Assurance requirement for all transit agencies to monitor their operations to identify hazards not identified through their Safety Risk Management processes. Also, FTA eliminated an entire section of recordkeeping requirements related to safety risk mitigation, safety performance assessments, and employee safety training. FTA further tailored the rule for small operators and reduced their requirements under Safety Assurance. Small public transportation providers only need to develop processes for safety performance monitoring and measurement; they do not need to develop processes for management of change and continuous improvement. Through the elimination of these requirements for small public transportation providers, and through this tailored approach, FTA believes that it has reduced their burdens significantly. Finally, FTA notes that in light of various public comments, FTA is deferring regulatory action regarding the applicability of this rule to operators of public transportation systems that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds. FTA is deferring action pending further evaluation of information and safety data related to these operators to determine the appropriate level of regulatory burden necessary to address the safety risk presented by these operators. X. Tribal Issues 1. Applicability of the Rule to Tribes Comments: Several commenters suggested that some tribes operate modest public transportation systems and receive Federal financial assistance through either the discretionary or formula tribal transit programs under 49 U.S.C. 5311. One commenter stated that some tribes receive funds as subrecipients of States under 49 U.S.C. 5311, and therefore, FTA should exclude those subrecipients from this rule. The commenter also requested FTA to clarify the applicability of this rule to tribes. Finally, this commenter recommend that FTA’s final rule exempt tribes from the definition of ‘‘recipient’’ under the proposed provisions of 49 CFR 673.1 until FTA has undertaken additional consultation with tribes and develops a template safety plan. Response: FTA appreciates the commenter who stated that tribes operate modest public transportation systems, and in response, FTA has designed this rule to be as flexible and scalable as possible for smaller operators. In light of various public comments, FTA is deferring regulatory action regarding the applicability of this rule to operators of public transportation systems that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds, including tribal transit operators. FTA is deferring action pending further evaluation of additional information and safety data related to these operators to determine the appropriate level of regulatory burden necessary to address the safety risk presented by these operators. FTA has undertaken consultation with tribes throughout this rulemaking, and these efforts are described in more detail below. 2. The State’s Role in Tribal Safety Plans Comments: A few commenters recommended that FTA require tribes to develop their own safety plans, even if they are a State’s subrecipients under 49 U.S.C. 5311, unless a State voluntarily agrees to draft and certify a safety plan for a tribal subrecipient. Some commenters expressed concerns that a State’s preparation of safety plans for tribes could interfere with tribal sovereignty. One commenter suggested that a State’s interaction with a tribe in relation to a safety plan is unwarranted and inconsistent with the laws and treaties that govern the status and protections for tribes. The commenter asserted that the Tribal Transit Program funded under 49 U.S.C. 5311(c) is not a subset of the Section 5311 program; it is a separate and direct tribal program and the rules associated with its administration should be structured accordingly. Several commenters stated that there often are positive relationships between States and tribes, but FTA should not treat tribes as subcomponents of State transit systems given the independent status of tribes. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34455 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations One commenter expressed concern that FTA would be less willing to provide technical assistance to tribes if States draft and certify their safety plans. Response: FTA recognizes the administrative and financial burdens that this rule may impose upon smaller transit operators, such as tribes. In an effort to relieve this burden, FTA is deferring regulatory action regarding the applicability of this rule to operators of public transportation systems that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds, including tribal transit operators. FTA is deferring action pending further evaluation of information and safety data to determine the appropriate level of regulatory burden necessary to address the safety risk presented by these operators. 3. Financial Impact on Tribes Comments: Several commenters stated that the proposed rule would result in administrative costs to tribes, such as costs for additional staff time and resources. One commenter stated that, like many other smaller transit agencies, tribal transit managers may have many different roles and shared duties, so the requirement for an Accountable Executive may be problematic because the staff are not structured in the way the proposed rule seems to envision. The commenter said that compliance with the rule may require consultants or new staff to handle the extra reporting paperwork and separation of positions, which would be difficult with limited resources. This commenter recommended that FTA should incorporate the following language somewhere into its rule: ‘‘at agencies where such delineations exist between administrative positions.’’ Several commenters noted that some tribes receive limited funding. One commenter stated that the average annual apportionment for tribal transit agencies is almost $220,000 and the average annual discretionary award is about $77,000, and some of 100 tribes participating in the Tribal Transit Program have apportionments as low as $4,000 annually. Several commenters argued that, for a tribe whose only source of Federal funding for its Tribal Transit Program is a $25,000 grant, the compliance costs associated with this rule (such as personnel time and the possible need for outside consultants) could easily consume the entire grant. The commenter stated that, although States divide more than $8.6 billion in Federal transit grants for Federal Fiscal Year 2016, tribes receive only $30 million under the Tribal Transit Program and an extra $5 million for the discretionary Tribal Transit Program under 49 U.S.C. 5311. Response: FTA acknowledges that many smaller transit operators, including tribes, may experience substantial costs in complying with this rule. In light of the potential financial burden on smaller operators, including tribes, FTA is deferring regulatory action regarding the applicability of this rule to operators of public transportation systems that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds. FTA is deferring action pending further evaluation of information and safety data related to determine the appropriate level of regulatory burden necessary to address the safety risk presented by these operators. 4. Tribal Consultation Comments: Several commenters expressed concern regarding FTA’s consultation with tribes. Several commenters alleged that FTA conducted no consultation with tribes, including meetings, conference calls, or webinars. Several commenters suggested that FTA conduct additional consultation with tribes, particularly given their smaller sizes. Several commenters disagreed with FTA’s preliminary determination that the rule would not have a substantial direct effect on tribes or impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribes, which is the criteria that would trigger tribal consultation under Executive Order 13175 and the U.S. Department of Transportation’s tribal consultation policy. One commenter stated that the rule would have direct effects on tribes by adding regulatory requirements on them, thus changing the relationship between tribes and the Federal government with respect to the inspection, investigation, audits, examinations, and testing of transit infrastructure and rolling stock. This commenter expressed concern that courts have emphasized the need for advance consultation with tribes on rulemaking efforts that may impact them, and cited Wyoming v. Department of the Interior in which the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming issued a preliminary injunction against Bureau of Land Management’s hydraulic fracturing regulations because the agency failed to adequately consult with tribes. Another commenter stated that the promulgation of this rule may conflict with the Tribal Self-Governance Program created by the FAST Act, and asserted that the Tribal Self-Governance Program requires a negotiated rulemaking committee to develop rules and regulations for all modes of funding and U.S. Department of Transportation programs, led by the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tribal Government Affairs. One commenter suggested that, instead of requiring States to draft and certify safety plans on behalf of tribes, FTA should work with tribes to develop a model safety plan specifically for tribes. Response: As a preliminary matter, FTA notes that it conducted extensive outreach with tribes throughout this rulemaking. Specifically, on February 12, 2016, FTA conducted public outreach for tribes and hosted a Tribal Technical Assistance Workshop wherein FTA presented its proposed rule and responded to numerous technical questions from tribes. FTA subsequently delivered the same presentation during a webinar series open to all members of the public on February 24, March 1, March 2, and March 3. On March 7, FTA delivered the same presentation at an outreach session hosted by the National Rural Transit Assistance Program, which also was open to all members of the public. During each of these public outreach sessions and the public webinar series, FTA received and responded to numerous technical questions regarding the NPRM. FTA recorded the presentations, including the question and answer sessions, and made available the following documents on the public docket for this rulemaking (Docket FTA–2015–0021): (1) FTA’s PowerPoint Presentation from the public outreach sessions and public webinar series (https:// www.regulations.gov/document?D=FTA- 2015-0021-0012); (2) a written transcript of FTA’s public webinar of March 1, 2016 (https://www.regulations.gov/ document?D=FTA-2015-0021-0010); (3) a consolidated list of every Question and FTA Answer from the public outreach sessions and public webinar series (https://www.regulations.gov/ document?D=FTA-2015-0021-0041); and (4) the results of polling questions from FTA’s public outreach sessions (https://www.regulations.gov/ document?D=FTA-2015-0021-0011). FTA also uploaded onto YouTube an audiovisual recording of its webinar from March 1, 2016. The video is available at the following link: https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBj5HRatw GA&feature=youtu.be. FTA also notes that, in advance of publishing an NPRM, FTA sought comment from the transit industry, including tribes, on a wide range of topics pertaining to safety and asset management through an ANPRM. In the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34456 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations NPRM, FTA asked specific questions about how today’s rule should apply to tribal recipients and subrecipients of Section 5311 funds. In light of the comments that FTA received from tribes throughout the rulemaking process, FTA is deferring regulatory action regarding applicability of this rule to operators of public transportation systems that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds, including tribal transit operators. FTA is deferring action pending further evaluation of additional information and safety data to determine the appropriate level of regulatory burden necessary to address the safety risk presented by these operators. IV. Section-by-Section Analysis Subpart A—General 673.1 Applicability This section explains that this regulation applies to all States, local governmental authorities, and other operators of public transportation systems that are recipients and subrecipients of Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53. At this time, the regulation does not apply to an operator of a public transportation system that only receives Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5310, 49 U.S.C. 5311, or both 49 U.S.C. 5310 and 49 U.S.C. 5311. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d), a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan is required of all operators of public transportation systems, whereas in the past, a ‘‘system safety program plan’’ only was required of rail fixed guideway public transportation systems, in accordance with the former regulatory provisions at 49 CFR 659.17. Each operator of a public transportation system must comply with today’s rule within one calendar year of this rule’s effective date. 673.3 Policy This section explains that FTA is utilizing the principles and methods of SMS as the basis for this regulation and all other regulations and policies FTA has issued and will issue under the authority of 49 U.S.C. 5329, to the extent practicable and consistent with law and other applicable requirements (such as those for regulatory review). FTA’s standards for SMS are flexible and scalable and may be tailored to the size and operating complexity of the transit operator. 673.5 Definitions This section sets forth a number definitions, many of which are based on the principles and methods of SMS. Most notably, readers should refer to ‘‘Accountable Executive,’’ ‘‘Hazard,’’ ‘‘Operator of a Public Transportation System,’’ ‘‘Safety Assurance,’’ ‘‘Safety Management System,’’ ‘‘Safety Management Policy,’’ ‘‘Safety Promotion,’’ ‘‘Safety Risk Management,’’ and ‘‘Small Public Transportation Provider.’’ In recent years, SMS has emerged as the preferable practice for enhancing safety in all modes of transportation, and the Secretary of Transportation instructed each of the Department’s operating administrations to develop rules, plans, and programs to apply SMS to their grant recipients and regulated communities. Many of the SMS-related definitions in §673.5 are similar to those set forth in FAA’s SMS regulation, entitled ‘‘Safety Management Systems for Domestic, Flag, and Supplemental Operations Certificate Holders,’’ 14 CFR parts 5 and 119, 80 FR 1308, Jan. 8, 2015. Additionally, a set of frequently asked questions about SMS are available on FTA’s website at http://www.fta.dot.gov/ tso_15177.html. FTA is incorporating these same definitions for SMS in its related rulemakings for the Public Transportation Safety Program and the Public Transportation Safety Certification Training Program, and FTA is incorporating these same definitions into the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. FTA includes a definition for ‘‘Accountable Executive’’ that identifies the person at a transit agency that has the responsibility and accountability for the implementation of SMS and control and direction of the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan and the Transit Asset Management Plan. FTA includes definitions for ‘‘Safety Risk Management,’’ ‘‘Risk,’’ ‘‘Safety Assurance,’’ and ‘‘Safety Management Policy,’’ all key terms to the implementation of SMS. This section also defines a number of terms used repeatedly throughout the other safety programs authorized by 49 U.S.C. 5329. Some of these terms are included in FTA’s new State Safety Oversight Rule at 49 CFR part 674, which was issued prior to today’s final rule. FTA intends to have the same definitions for all terms utilized in its safety programs. Readers should refer, specifically, to the definitions of ‘‘Accident,’’ ‘‘Event,’’ ‘‘Hazard,’’ ‘‘Incident,’’ ‘‘Investigation,’’ ‘‘Occurrence,’’ ‘‘Transit Agency,’’ and ‘‘Rail Transit Agency.’’ FTA has updated its definitions of ‘‘Accountable Executive,’’ ‘‘Safety Risk Assessment,’’ ‘‘Safety Risk Management,’’ and ‘‘Transit Asset Management Plan’’ to make them consistent with definitions of these terms utilized in the SSO rule and the Transit Asset Management rule which were issued prior to today’s final rule. FTA also added a definition of ‘‘Rail Fixed Guideway Public Transportation System,’’ which it defined in its SSO rule. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(3)(B), FTA must issue a rule that designates which 49 U.S.C. 5307 small public transportation providers may have States draft Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans on their behalf. This section defines ‘‘Small Public Transportation Provider’’ (in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(3)(B)) as ‘‘a recipient or subrecipient of Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5307 that has one hundred (100) or fewer vehicles in peak revenue service and does not operate a rail fixed guideway public transportation system.’’ FTA includes definitions for the terms ‘‘National Public Transportation Safety Plan,’’ ‘‘Transit Asset Management Plan,’’ and ‘‘Equivalent Authority,’’ all of which are consistent with the use of those terms in the statutes and FTA’s related rulemakings on safety and transit asset management. Subpart B—Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans 673.11 General Requirements This section outlines the minimum elements to be included in a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1), this section requires each operator of public transportation subject to this rule to develop and certify that it has a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan consistent with this part. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(3)(B), §673.11(d) requires each State to draft the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for small transportation providers as defined in today’s final rule. A State is not required to develop a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for a small public transportation provider if that agency notifies the State that it will develop its own plan. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(A), §673.11(a)(1) requires that each Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan, and any updates thereto, must be signed by the transit agency’s designated Accountable Executive and approved by the transit agency’s Board of Directors, or an Equivalent Authority. In today’s final rule, the accountability for the contents of a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan is formally elevated to the Accountable Executive and Board of Directors. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34457 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(B), (C), (D), (E), (F), and (G), a transit agency must establish: Methods for identifying and evaluating safety risks throughout all elements of its public transportation system; strategies to minimize the exposure of the public, personnel, and property to hazards and unsafe conditions; a process and timeline for conducting an annual review and update of its safety plan; safety performance targets; a Chief Safety Officer who reports directly to the general manager, president, or equivalent officer; and a comprehensive staff training program for the operations personnel and personnel directly responsible for safety. These statutory requirements fit into the four key pillars of SMS: Safety Management Policy, Safety Risk Management, Safety Assurance, and Safety Promotion. Consequently, FTA is requiring each transit agency to develop and implement an SMS under §673.11(a)(2); this SMS will satisfy the statutory requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(B), (C), (D), (E), (F), and (G). FTA recognizes that a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for a large, multi-modal, complex public transportation system most likely will be more complex than that of a very small bus operator. The scalability of SMS will allow transit agencies to develop safety plans that will meet the unique needs of their operating environments. FTA established a minimal set of Safety Assurance requirements for small public transportation providers to minimize their administrative, financial, and regulatory burdens. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(E), §673.11(a)(3) requires that each Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan must include safety performance targets based on the safety performance measures established by FTA in the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. In the National Public Transportation Safety Plan, FTA is adopting four initial safety performance measures: (1) Fatalities, (2) Injuries, (3) Safety Events, and (4) System Reliability. These safety performance measures are intended to reduce safety events, fatalities, and injuries. These measures are broad so that they will be relevant to all public transportation modes, and they are intended to focus transit agencies on the development of specific and measureable targets, as well as the actions each agency would implement to improve their own safety outcomes. Through the SMS process, FTA expects transit agencies to develop their own performance indicators and regularly monitor the performance of their systems to ensure that they are meeting their targets and improving safety outcomes. FTA expects transit agencies to evaluate their safety performances and determine whether they should change their safety performance targets at least annually when the transit agencies are reviewing and updating their Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans. A State or transit agency must make its safety performance targets available to States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) to aid States and MPOs in the selection of their own performance targets. Pursuant to §673.11(a)(4), each Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan must address any standards or requirements, as applicable, set forth in FTA’s Public Transportation Safety Program and FTA’s National Public Transportation Safety Plan. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(D), §673.11(a)(5) requires that each transit agency must establish a process and timeline for conducting an annual review and update of its Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan. Pursuant to §673.11(a)(6), each rail transit agency must include, or incorporate by reference, in its Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan an emergency preparedness and response plan. Each emergency preparedness and response plan should address, at a minimum: The assignment of employee responsibilities, as necessary and appropriate, during an emergency; the integration of responses to all hazards, as appropriate; and processes for coordination with Federal, State, regional, and local officials with roles and responsibilities for emergency preparedness and response in the transit agency’s service area. FTA understands that a transit agency may have developed an emergency preparedness and response plan that addresses these minimum requirements in accordance with regulations from other Federal and State agencies. Historically, FTA has required rail fixed guideway public transportation systems to have emergency preparedness plans through the former State Safety Oversight rule at 49 CFR 659.19(k). FTA intends to require rail transit systems to continue to implement the twenty-one elements of their SSPPs as required under the former provisions of 49 CFR part 659; FTA has repackaged the elements of SSPPs into the four elements of SMS required in today’s rule. FTA is establishing the requirement for emergency preparedness and response plans in today’s rule under §673.11(a)(6), and the elements of SMS in Subpart C cover remaining requirements. FTA has developed a crosswalk between each of the twenty- one elements of system safety program plans and each of the elements of SMS. FTA added this crosswalk to the docket and made the crosswalk available on its website as a guidance document at http://fta.dot.gov/tso.html. Additional, more comprehensive guidance regarding the relationship between SSPPs and PTASPs is forthcoming, and FTA will post that guidance on its website (see https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations- and-guidance/safety/transit-safety- oversight-tso). FTA notes that there are safety models that include emergency preparedness as a key element. For example, FAA requires certain air carriers to have emergency preparedness plans. See 14 CFR 5.27. Additionally, FRA recently issued a final System Safety Program rule under 49 CFR part 270 which requires railroads to have emergency preparedness plans (see http:// www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/Details/L18294). Recent safety-related events have demonstrated the need for emergency preparedness plans in improving safety outcomes nationally. In addition to the above general requirements, FTA expects a transit agency to comply with all other applicable Federal, State, and local requirements, laws, regulations, and codes as they may relate to safety. Pursuant to §673.11(b), a transit agency may develop one Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for all modes of transit service, or it may develop separate Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans for each mode of service not subject to safety regulation by another Federal entity. If a transit agency has a safety plan for its commuter rail service, passenger ferry service, or aviation service, then the transit agency may not use that plan for purposes of satisfying 49 CFR part 673; the transit agency must develop a separate Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan consistent with this part. Pursuant to §673.11(c), each transit agency must maintain its Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan in accordance with the recordkeeping requirements of Subpart D. Pursuant to §673.11(d), each State must draft and certify a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan on behalf of any small public transportation provider located inside of that particular State. A State is not required to draft a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan if a small public transportation provider notifies the State that it will draft its own plan. In either instance, the transit agency must VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34458 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations 3 NTSB issued Safety Recommendation R–10/02 for the WMATA Metrorail train collision accident on June 22, 2009, found at: http://www.ntsb.gov/ investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/ RAR1002.pdf. Through this report, NTSB recommends that ‘‘FTA facilitate the development of non-punitive safety reporting programs at all transit agencies [in order] to collect reports from employees in all divisions within their agencies.’’ 4 See the NTSB’s hearing materials at http:// www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Pages/2015_WMATA_ Washington_DC_IHG_Agenda.aspx. and http:// dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms/search/ document.cfm?docID=432379&docketID= 57383&mkey=90596. ultimately implement and carry out its safety plan. If a State drafts and certifies a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan on behalf of a transit agency, and the transit agency later opts to draft and certify its own Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan, then the transit agency must notify the State, and the transit agency would have one year from the date of the notification to draft and certify a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan that is compliant with this part. Pursuant to §673.11(e), any rail fixed guideway public transportation system that had an SSPP, in accordance with the former SSO rule at 49 CFR part 659 as of October 1, 2012, may keep that plan in effect until one year after the effective date of this final rule. Pursuant to §673.11(f), agencies that operate passenger ferries regulated by USCG or rail fixed guideway public transportation service regulated by FRA are not required to develop safety plans for those modes of service. 673.13 Certification of Compliance In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1), §673.13(a) provides that not later than one year after the effective date of the final rule, each transit agency must certify its compliance with the requirements of this part. For small public transportation providers, a State must certify compliance unless the provider opts to draft and certify its own safety plan. In those cases where a State certifies compliance for a small public transportation provider, this certification also must occur within one year after the effective date of this final rule. In addition to certification, and consistent with the new SSO rule at 49 CFR part 674, each SSOA must review and approve each Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for every rail transit system within its jurisdiction. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(e)(4)(iv), an SSOA must have the authority to review, approve, oversee, and enforce the implementation of the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans of transit agencies operating rail fixed guideway public transportation systems. Section 673.13(b) requires that each transit agency or State certify compliance with part 673 on an annual basis. 673.15 Coordination With Metropolitan, Statewide, and Non- Metropolitan Planning Processes In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5303(h)(2)(B) and 5304(d)(2)(B), each State and transit agency must make its safety performance targets available to States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations to aid in the planning process. Section 673.15(b) requires, to the maximum extent practicable, a State or transit agency to coordinate with States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations in the selection of State and MPO safety performance targets. Subpart C—Safety Management Systems 673.21 General Requirements This section outlines the SMS elements that each transit agency must establish in its Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan. Under today’s final, each transit agency must implement an SMS, and each transit agency should scale the SMS to the size, scope, and complexity of the transit agency’s operations. Each transit agency must establish processes and procedures which include the four main pillars of SMS: (1) Safety Management Policy; (2) Safety Risk Management; (3) Safety Assurance; and (4) Safety Promotion. FTA expects that the scope and detail for each activity will vary based on the size and complexity of the system. FTA anticipates that activities, and documentation of those activities, for a small bus transit agency will be substantially less than those of a large multi-modal system. FTA has developed a minimal set of requirements under Safety Assurance for all small public transportation providers. To help clarify SMS development and implementation, FTA is issuing guidance and a safety plan template to the industry concurrent with today’s final rule, and FTA designed these documents to accommodate the variance in transit system mode, size, and complexity. 673.23 Safety Management Policy Pursuant to §673.23(a), a transit agency must establish the organizational accountabilities and responsibilities necessary for implementing SMS and capture these under the first component of SMS, Safety Management Policy. The success of a transit agency’s SMS is dependent upon the commitment of the entire organization and begins with the highest levels of transit agency management. The level of detail for organizational accountabilities and responsibilities should be commensurate with the size and complexity of the transit agency. The Safety Management Policy statement must contain the transit agency’s safety objectives. These objectives should include a broad description of the agency’s overarching safety goals, which would be based upon that agency’s unique needs. Pursuant to §673.23(b), a transit agency must include in its Safety Management Policy statement a process that allows employees to report safety conditions to senior management. This process must provide protections for employees who report safety conditions to senior management and a description of behaviors that are unacceptable and that would not be exempt from disciplinary actions. These procedures are critical for ensuring safety. A reporting program allows employees who identify safety hazards and risks in the day-to-day duties to directly notify senior personnel, without fear of reprisal, so that the hazards and risks can be mitigated or eliminated. NTSB has emphasized the need for transit agencies to have non-punitive employee safety reporting programs,3 and this need was discussed at length in NTSB’s Investigative Hearing on the WMATA Smoke and Electrical Arcing Incident in Washington, DC on June 23 and 24, 2015.4 Pursuant to §673.23(c), the Safety Management Policy statement must be communicated throughout the transit agency, including the Board of Directors (or equivalent authority), and each transit agency must make its Safety Management Policy statement readily available to all of its employees and contractors. Pursuant to §673.23(d), each transit agency must establish its accountabilities, responsibilities, and organizational structure necessary to meet its safety objectives, particularly as they relate to the development and management of the transit agency’s SMS. The level of detail in this section of the safety plan should be commensurate with the size and complexity of a transit agency’s operations. At a minimum, a transit agency must identify an Accountable Executive, a Chief Safety Officer or SMS Executive, and agency leadership, executive management, and key staff who would be responsible for the implementation of a transit agency’s safety plan. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34459 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations 5 See FTA’s former State Safety Oversight rule at 49 CFR 659.19(u). 6 The United States Department of Transportation is administering a bicycle and pedestrian safety initiative, and FTA encourages transit agencies to consider that initiative when developing their safety plans (see https://www.transportation.gov/ safer-people-safer-streets). 673.25 Safety Risk Management Pursuant to §673.25(a), each transit agency must establish and implement its process for managing safety risk, including the following three steps: (1) Safety hazard identification, (2) safety risk assessment, and (3) safety risk mitigation, for all elements of its public transportation system, including changes to its public transportation system that may impact safety performance. At a minimum, FTA expects each transit agency to apply its safety risk management process to its existing operations and maintenance procedures, the design of a new public transportation system and other capital projects, changes to its existing public transportation system, new operations of service to the public, new operations or maintenance procedures, organizational changes, and changes to operations or maintenance procedures. Additionally, FTA expects each transit agency to develop measures to ensure that safety principles, requirements, and representatives are included in the transit agency’s procurement process.5 Pursuant to §673.25(b)(1), each transit agency must establish a process for safety hazard identification, including the identification of the sources, both proactive and reactive, for identifying hazards and their associated consequences. Activities for hazard identification could include formalized processes where a transit agency identifies hazards throughout its entire system, logs them into a database, performs risk analyses, and identifies mitigation measures. These activities also could include safety focus groups, reviews of safety reporting trends, and for smaller bus systems, it could mean holding a meeting with a few bus drivers, discussing hazards on the system, deciding which ones pose the greatest risk, and then developing mitigation. A transit agency must apply its process for safety hazard identification to all elements of its system, including but not limited to its operational activities, system expansions, and state of good repair activities. FTA encourages transit agencies to take into account bicycle and pedestrian safety concerns, along with other factors, as agencies are conducting Safety Risk Management.6 A transit agency should consider the results of its asset condition assessments when performing safety hazard identification activities within its SMS. The results of the condition assessments, and subsequent SMS analysis, will inform a transit agency’s determination as to whether an asset meets the state of good repair standards under 49 CFR part 625. Pursuant to §673.25(b)(2), each transit agency must include, as a source for safety hazard identification, data and information provided by an oversight authority and FTA. Safety hazard identification activities should be commensurate with the size of the transit agency’s operations. For example, the number of identified hazards for a small rural bus system may be less than the number of hazards identified for a large multi-modal system. Pursuant to §673.25(c), each transit agency must establish procedures for assessing and prioritizing safety risks related to the potential consequences of hazards identified and analyzed in §673.25(b). Each transit agency must assess safety risks in terms of probability (the likelihood of the hazard producing the potential consequences) and severity (the damage, or the potential consequences of a hazard, that may be caused if the hazard is not eliminated or its consequences are not successfully mitigated). Pursuant to §673.25(d), each transit agency also must establish criteria for the development of safety risk mitigations that are necessary based on the results of the agency’s safety risk assessments. For example, a transit agency may decide that the criteria for developing safety risk mitigations could be the identification of a safety risk, benefit-cost analysis, a system level change (such as the addition of new technology on a vehicle), a change to operational procedures, or the expansion of service. To further illustrate these examples, a transit agency may color code different levels of safety risk (‘‘red’’ as high, ‘‘yellow’’ as medium, and ‘‘green’’ as minor) and develop different types of safety risk mitigations to correspond to those levels. 673.27 Safety Assurance Pursuant to §673.27(a), each transit agency must develop and implement a process for Safety Assurance. Rail fixed guideway public transportation systems and recipients and subrecipients of Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 that operate more than one hundred vehicles in peak revenue service must develop processes for (1) safety performance monitoring and measurement, (2) management of change, and (3) continuous improvement. Small public transportation providers only need to develop a process for safety performance monitoring and measurement. Each transit agency’s safety assurance activities should be scaled to the size and complexity of its operations. Through these activities, each transit agency should accurately determine whether it is meeting its safety objectives and safety performance targets, as well as the extent to which it is effectively implementing its SMS. Each transit agency must conduct an annual review of the effectiveness of its safety risk mitigations. Pursuant to §673.27(b), each transit agency must identify the data and information that it will collect from its operations, maintenance, and public transportation services so that it may monitor the agency’s safety performance as well as the effectiveness of its SMS. Each transit agency must monitor its operations and maintenance protocols and procedures, and any safety risk mitigations, to ensure that it is implementing them as planned. Each transit agency must investigate safety events (as defined in this final rule) and any reports of non-compliance with applicable regulations, standards, and legal authority. Finally, each transit agency must continually monitor information reported to it through any internal safety reporting programs, including the employee safety reporting program. Pursuant to §673.27(c), rail fixed guideway public transportation systems and recipients and subrecipients that are subject to this rule and operate more than one hundred vehicles in peak revenue service must manage changes in their systems. These transit agencies must develop processes for identifying and assessing changes that may introduce new hazards or impact safety performance. If a transit agency determines that a change might impact safety, then the transit agency would need to evaluate the change using Safety Risk Management activities established under §673.25. These changes would include changes to operations or maintenance procedures, changes to service, the design and construction of major capital projects (such as New Starts and Small Starts projects and associated certifications), organizational changes, and any other changes to a transit agency’s system that may impact safety performance. Each rail transit agency should include a description of the safety certification process that it uses to ensure that safety concerns and hazards are adequately addressed prior to the initiation of passenger operations VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34460 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations for News Starts and other major capital projects to extend, rehabilitate, or modify an existing system, or to replace vehicles and equipment. Pursuant to §673.27(d), rail fixed guideway public transportation systems and recipients and subrecipients that are subject to this rule and operate more than one hundred vehicles in peak revenue service must regularly assess their safety performance. If a transit agency identifies any deficiencies during a safety performance assessment, then it must develop and carry out, under the direction of the Accountable Executive, a plan to address the identified safety deficiencies. FTA expect each transit agency to conduct a safety performance assessment at least annually, and the safety performance assessment can be completed in conjunction with the annual review and update to its overall safety plan as required by 49 U.S.C. 5329(d)(1)(D) and 49 CFR 673.11(a)(5). 673.29 Safety Promotion This section requires each transit agency to establish competencies and training for all agency employees directly responsible for safety, and to establish and maintain the means for communicating safety performance and SMS information. Pursuant to §673.29(a), each transit agency must establish a comprehensive safety training program. Through the safety training program, each transit agency must require each employee, as applicable, to complete training to enable the individual to meet his or her role and responsibilities for safety, and to complete refresher training, as necessary, to stay current with the agency’s safety practices and procedures. Pursuant to §673.29(b), each transit agency must ensure that all employees are aware of any policies, activities, and procedures that are related to their safety-related roles and responsibilities. Safety communications may include information on hazards and safety risks that are relevant to the employee’s role and responsibilities; explain reasons that a transit agency introduces or changes policies, activities, or procedures; and explain to an employee when actions are taken in response to reports submitted by the employee through the employee safety reporting program. FTA expects that each transit agency would define the means and mechanisms for effective safety communication based on its organization, structure, and size of operations. Subpart D—Safety Plan Documentation and Recordkeeping 673.31 Safety Plan Documentation This section requires each transit agency to keep records of its documents that are developed in accordance with this part. FTA expects a transit agency to maintain documents that set forth its Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan, including those related to the implementation of its SMS such as the results from SMS processes and activities. For the purpose of reviews, investigations, audits, or other purposes, this section requires each transit agency to make these documents available to FTA, SSOAs in the case of rail transit systems, and other Federal agencies as appropriate. A transit agency must maintain these documents for a minimum of three years. V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and USDOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits justify its costs (recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify); tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society; assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives; and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximizes net benefits—including potential economic, environmental, public health, and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity. Executive Order 13563 also emphasizes the importance of harmonizing rules and promoting flexibility. FTA drafted this final rule in accordance with the principles set forth in Executive Orders 12866 and 13563. FTA has determined that this final rule is a significant regulatory action due to significant public interest in the area of transit safety. However, this rule is not estimated to be ‘‘economically significant’’ within the meaning of Executive Order 12866. As discussed in greater detail below, FTA was able to estimate some, but not all, of the rule’s costs. FTA was able to estimate the costs for transit agencies to develop and implement Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans which are approximately $41 million in the first year, and $30 million in each subsequent year, with annualized costs of $31 million discounted at 7 percent. These costs result from developing and certifying safety plans, documenting the SMS approach, implementing SMS, and associated recordkeeping. FTA was not able to estimate the costs of actions that transit agencies would be required to take to mitigate risk as a result of implementing this rule, such as vehicle modifications, additional training, technology investments, or changes to operating procedures and practices. FTA has placed in the docket a final Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) that analyzes the benefits and costs of the regulatory changes in accordance with Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, and United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) policy. Through this final rule, FTA requires all operators of public transportation systems that receive Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 to develop and implement Public Transportation Safety Plans in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329, using the SMS approach. As discussed above, FTA is deferring regulatory action at this time regarding recipients of FTA financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5310 and/or 49 U.S.C. 5311. SMS is a flexible, scalable approach to safety that has been widely adopted across multiple modes of transportation in both the public and private sectors and overlaps significantly with the requirements included in 49 U.S.C. 5329. It employs a systematic, data- driven approach in which risks to safety are identified, then controlled or mitigated to acceptable levels. SMS brings business-like methods and principles to safety, similar to the ways in which an organization manages its finances, through safety plans, with targets and performance indicators, and continuous monitoring of safety performance throughout an organization. In addition to responding to the specific statutory mandate, this final rule responds to National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommendations regarding an expansion of SMS to reduce the risks of transit crashes. From 2004 to 2016, NTSB reported on eleven transit accidents that, collectively, resulted in 16 fatalities, 386 injuries, and over $30 million in property damages. Although transit systems have historically been among the safest means of surface transportation, the transit industry is facing increased pressures at a time when ridership has grown, infrastructure is aging, and large numbers of the workforce are retiring. During that same 2004–2016 time period, transit agencies reported over 290,000 incidents and other events, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34461 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations more than 2,600 fatalities, and over 301,000 injuries to the NTD. This RIA provides quantitative estimates of the expected compliance costs associated with the rule. Costs for transit agencies were estimated based on the staff labor hours, information technology systems, and travel costs associated with implementing the requirements of the proposed rule, with adjustments for agency size and for agencies’ existing level of maturity with SMS approaches. FTA estimated three main cost areas: (1) Developing and certifying safety plans; (2) implementing and documenting the SMS approach; and (3) associated recordkeeping. Staff time was monetized using data on wage rates and benefits in the transit industry. Over the 20-year analysis period, total costs are estimated at $324 million in present value (using a 7% discount rate), or the equivalent of $31 million per year. As previously noted, FTA was unable to estimate the cost of actions that agencies would take to mitigate or eliminate safety problems identified through implementation of their safety plans. FTA is unaware of information sources or methods to predict with sufficient confidence the number or type of safety problems agencies will identify through implementation of their safety plans, or the number, type, and cost of actions that agencies will take to address such problems. For similar reasons, FTA also is unable to quantify the rule’s benefits. FTA sought information from the public through the NPRM for this rulemaking that would assist FTA with analyzing the benefits and costs of actions by agencies to mitigate or eliminate safety problems such as the number, types, benefits, and costs of such actions, but FTA did not receive adequate data from the public to assist with this effort. FTA calculated potential safety benefits that could be realized by bus and rail modes if safety management practices outlined in the rule are followed to identify and implement investment strategies to reduce safety risk. FTA monetized benefits using information on transit crash costs, including direct costs and USDOT- standard statistical values for fatality and injury prevention. Although many other sectors report reductions in safety incidents after adopting SMS, it is not possible to transfer that experience to the transit industry due to the differences in organizational structures and practices. FTA was unable to quantify the rule’s benefits. To estimate safety benefits, one would need information regarding the causes of safety events and the factors that may cause future events. This information is generally unavailable in the public transportation sector, given the infrequency and diversity of the type of safety events that occur. In addition, one would need information about the safety problems that agencies are likely to find through implementation of their safety plans and the actions agencies are likely to take to address those problems. Instead of quantifying benefits, FTA estimated the potential safety benefits if additional unquantified mitigation investments occur. The potential safety benefits are an estimate of the cost of bus and rail safety events over a future 20-year period. FTA extrapolated the estimate based on the cost of bus and rail incidents that occurred from 2010 to 2016, assuming no growth in the number of incidents in the future. The benefits of SMS primarily will result from mitigating actions. As previously stated, FTA could not account for the benefits and costs of such actions in this analysis. FTA has not estimated the benefits of implementing SMS without mitigating actions, but expects such benefits are unlikely to be large. Estimated costs for the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans include certain activities that likely will yield safety improvements, such as improved communication, identification of hazards, and greater employee awareness. It is plausible that these changes alone could produce reductions in safety events that surpass estimated costs. Under the performance management framework established by MAP–21, States, MPOs, and transit providers must establish targets in key national performance areas to document expectations for future performance. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 5303(h)(2)(B)(ii) and 5304(d)(2)(B)(ii), States and MPOs must coordinate the selection of their performance targets, to the maximum extent practicable, with performance targets set by transit providers under 49 U.S.C. 5326 (transit asset management) and 49 U.S.C. 5329 (safety), to ensure consistency. In the joint FTA and FHWA Planning Rule, both agencies indicate that their performance-related rules would implement the basic elements of a performance management framework, including the establishment of measures and associated target setting. Because the performance-related rules implement these elements and the difficulty in estimating costs of target setting associated with unknown measures, the joint FTA and FHWA Planning Rule did not assess these costs. Rather, FTA and FHWA proposed that the costs associated with target setting at every level would be captured in each agency’s respective ‘‘performance management’’ rules. For example, in its second performance management rule NPRM, FHWA assumes that the incremental costs to States and MPOs for establishing performance targets reflect the incremental wage costs for an operations manager and a statistician to analyze performance-related data. The RIA accompanying the joint FTA and FHWA Planning Rule captures the costs of the effort by States, MPOs, and transit providers to coordinate in the setting of State and MPO transit performance targets for state of good repair and safety. FTA believes that the cost to MPOs and States to set transit performance targets is included within the costs of coordination. FTA requested comments on this issue through this rulemaking, and it received none. A summary of the potential benefits and costs of this rule is provided in Table 2 below. TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF THE COSTS AND THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS IF ADDITIONAL UNQUANTIFIED MITIGATION INVESTMENTS OCCUR Current dollar value 7% Discounted value 3% Discounted value Bus Events (20-Year Estimate) ................................................... $78,698,984,508 $38,413,831,624 $56,680,780,091 Rail Events (20-Year Estimate) ...................................................45,019,196,393 21,974,360,164 32,423,838,587 Total Potential Benefits (20-Year Estimate) ................................ 123,718,180,901 60,388,191,787 89,104,618,678 Qualitative Benefits ......................................................................•Reduced safety incidents with mitigation actions. •Reduced delays in operations. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34462 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF THE COSTS AND THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS IF ADDITIONAL UNQUANTIFIED MITIGATION INVESTMENTS OCCUR—Continued Current dollar value 7% Discounted value 3% Discounted value Estimated Costs (20-Year Estimate) ...........................................602,485,710 323,732,747 450,749,898 Unquantified Costs ......................................................................•Investments associated with mitigating safety risks (such as additional training, vehicle modification, operational changes, maintenance, and information dissemination). Estimated Cost (Annualized) ....................................................... ........................................30,558,081 30,297,473 Executive Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs) Executive Order 13771 applies to any action considered ‘‘significant’’ under Executive Order 12866 that imposes total costs greater than zero. Actions subject to Executive Order 13771 must be offset by the elimination of existing costs associated with at least two prior regulations. This final rule is an action under Executive Order 13771 because it is considered a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866. Regulatory Flexibility Act In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96–354, 5 U.S.C. 601–612), FTA has evaluated the effects of this rule on small entities and has determined that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rule will affect approximately 625 small entities, most of which are small government entities and small non- profit organizations that operate public transportation systems in small- urbanized areas. Compliance costs will vary according to agency size and complexity, the extent of current SMS practices, and the extent of current asset management practices. Costs are illustrated by an example calculation for a small operator (less than one hundred non-rail vehicles in maximum revenue service) of a public transportation system that receives Formula Grants for Urbanized Areas under 49 U.S.C. 5307, for which compliance costs are approximately $20,600 per agency (this estimate excludes the cost of mitigating actions). For the sake of comparison, while transit agency operations budgets vary significantly, the average for small Section 5307 agencies is around $6.3 million per year. Thus, the estimated costs of the rule are around 0.3% of agency budgets for small Section 5307 agencies. FTA is minimizing the costs for smaller operators of public transportation systems by requiring the States in which they are located to draft and certify Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans on their behalf, unless the operator chooses to develop and certify its own plan. Additionally, to lower the costs for smaller operators of public transportation systems, FTA is adopting the SMS approach to safety, which is scalable for the specific needs of a particular transit agency. To further reduce the burdens of this final rule, FTA tailored it by eliminating a series of Safety Assurance requirements specifically for small public transportation providers. As discussed in other sections of this document, small public transportation providers only need to develop Safety Assurance procedures for performance monitoring and measurement; they would not need to develop Safety Assurances procedures for management of change and continuous improvement. FTA also eliminated certain Safety Assurance and recordkeeping requirements for all transit operators, including small public transportation providers, to minimize the rule’s costs. Concurrent with today’s final rule, FTA is issuing a safety plan template with instructions and considerations to assist transit agencies with the development of their plans and to help reduce the overall costs associated with that effort. Overall, while the rule may affect a substantial number of small entities, these impacts would not be significant due to the low magnitude of the costs. Moreover, FTA has designed the rule to allow flexibility for small entities. FTA is providing additional analysis of the Regulatory Flexibility Act’s application to this rule in Regulatory Impact Analysis posted to the docket. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 This rule will not impose unfunded mandates as defined by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4, March 22, 1995, 109 Stat. 48; codified at 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.). Pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 1501(8), one of the purposes of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act is to consider ‘‘the effect of . . . Federal statutes and regulations that impose Federal intergovernmental mandates.’’ The term ‘‘Federal intergovernmental mandate’’ is defined at 2 U.S.C. 658(5)(A)(i) to mean ‘‘any provision in legislation, statute, or regulation that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or tribal governments, except . . . a condition of Federal assistance.’’ Given the fact that FTA’s authorizing statute at 49 U.S.C. 5329(d) makes the development and implementation of Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans a condition of FTA Federal financial assistance, and given that FTA is proposing to require transit agencies to annually certify that they have safety plans consistent with this rule as a condition of that Federal financial assistance, this rule will not impose unfunded mandates. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria established by Executive Order 13132, and FTA has determined that this rule will not have sufficient Federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism assessment. FTA has also determined that this rule will not preempt any State law or State regulation or affect the States’ abilities to discharge traditional State governmental functions. Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review) The regulations effectuating Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities apply to this rule. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. et seq.) (PRA), and the White House Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) implementing regulation at 5 CFR 1320.8(d), FTA is seeking approval from OMB for the Information Collection Request abstracted below. FTA acknowledges that this rule entails the collection of information to implement the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d). Specifically, an operator of a public VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34463 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations transportation system must do the following: (1) Develop and certify a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan; (2) implement and document the SMS approach; and (3) associated recordkeeping. As discussed above, FTA is deferring regulatory action at this time regarding recipients of FTA financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5310 and/or 49 U.S.C. 5311. FTA sought public comments to evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FTA’s functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; whether the estimation of the burden of the proposed information collection is accurate, including the validity of the methodologies and assumptions used; ways in which the quality, utility, and clarity of the information can be enhanced; and whether the burden can be minimized, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. FTA received no public comments on these issues. Readers should note that the information collection would be specific to each operator of a public transportation system in an effort to facilitate and record the operator’s safety responsibilities and activities. The paperwork burden for each operator of a public transportation system will be proportionate to the size and complexity of its operations. For example, an operator of a rail fixed guideway system and a bus system may need to generate more documentation than an operator of a bus system only. Also, readers should note that FTA has required rail fixed guideway public transportation systems to develop System Safety Program Plans and System Security Plans in accordance with the former regulatory requirements at 49 CFR part 659. FTA has collected information from States and State Safety Oversight Agencies regarding these plans, and FTA anticipates that operators of rail fixed guideway systems will utilize some of this documentation for purposes of developing Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans. Please see FTA’s currently approved collection, 2132–0558, available at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ PRAMain. Type of Collection: Operators of public transportation systems. Type of Review: OMB Clearance. New Information Collection Request. Summary of the Collection: The information collection includes (1) The development and certification of a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan; (2) the implementation and documentation of the SMS approach; and (3) associated recordkeeping. Need for and Expected Use of the Information to be Collected: Collection of information for this program is necessary to ensure that operators of public transportation systems are performing their safety responsibilities and activities required by law at 49 U.S.C. 5329(d). Without the creation of Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans, FTA would be unable to determine each State’s compliance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d). Respondents: Respondents include operators of public transportation as defined under 49 U.S.C. 5302(14). FTA is deferring regulatory action at this time on recipients of FTA financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5310 and/or 49 U.S.C. 5311. The total number of respondents is 336. This figure includes 242 respondents that are States, direct recipients, rail fixed guideway systems that receive Urbanized Area Formula Program funds under 49 U.S.C. 5307, or large bus systems that receive Urbanized Area Formula Program funds under 49 U.S.C. 5307. This figure also includes 94 respondents that receive Urbanized Area Formula Program funds under 49 U.S.C. 5307, operate one hundred or fewer vehicles in revenue service, and do not operate rail fixed guideway service that may draft and certify their own safety plans. Frequency: Annual. ESTIMATED TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN HOURS ON RESPONDENTS Total responses Burden hours per response Total annual burden Rail: Development/Certification .....................................................................................................60 48 2,862 Implement/Document ............................................................................................................60 1,114 66,869 Recordkeeping ...................................................................................................................... 60 43 2,562 Large 5307: Development/Certification .....................................................................................................127 48 6,123 Implement/Document ............................................................................................................127 760 96,581 Recordkeeping ...................................................................................................................... 127 42 5,298 Small 5307: Development/Certification .....................................................................................................94 19 1,773 Implement/Document ............................................................................................................625 270 168,622 Recordkeeping ...................................................................................................................... 625 38 23,647 States/Direct Recipients: Development/Certification .....................................................................................................55 40 2,206 Implement/Document ............................................................................................................55 0 0 Recordkeeping ...................................................................................................................... 55 0 0 Grand Total ...................................................................................................................336 2,422 376,543 FTA calculated costs using the same methodology that it used for the Regulatory Impact Analysis. FTA summarized the PRA costs in the table below. The total PRA cost of the rule is approximately $33 million per year averaged over the first three years, which is an average of $98,791 per respondent per year, or $38,256 per response per year. PRA costs Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total Rail: Development/Certification ......................................................................... $733,863 $86,858 $86,858 $907,579 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34464 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations PRA costs Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total Implement/Document ................................................................................ 9,366,439 6,651,817 6,651,817 22,670,072 Recordkeeping .......................................................................................... 1,179,917 1,179,917 1,179,917 3,539,750 Large 5307: Development/Certification ......................................................................... 1,624,085 137,866 137,866 1,899,818 Implement/Document ................................................................................ 9,235,788 6,593,697 6,593,697 22,423,182 Recordkeeping .......................................................................................... 1,830,066 1,830,066 1,830,066 5,490,199 Small 5307: Development/Certification ......................................................................... 436,058 48,929 48,929 533,917 Implement/Document ................................................................................ 12,166,099 9,118,251 9,118,251 30,402,601 Recordkeeping .......................................................................................... 3,565,974 3,565,974 3,565,974 10,697,922 States/Direct Recipients: Development/Certification ......................................................................... 425,782 20,045 20,045 465,871 Implement/Document ................................................................................0 0 0 0 Recordkeeping .......................................................................................... 183,333 183,333 183,333 550,000 National Environmental Policy Act The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), requires Federal agencies to analyze the potential environmental effects of their proposed actions either through a Categorical Exclusion, an Environmental Assessment, or an Environmental Impact Statement. This rule is categorically excluded under FTA’s NEPA implementing regulations at 23 CFR 771.118(c)(4), which covers planning and administrative activities that do not involve or lead directly to construction, such as the promulgation of rules, regulations, directives, and program guidance. FTA has determined that no unusual circumstances exist and that this Categorical Exclusion is applicable. Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations) Executive Order 12898 directs every Federal agency to make environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing the effects of all programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations. The DOT’s environmental justice initiatives accomplish this goal by involving the potentially affected public in developing transportation projects that fit harmoniously within their communities without sacrificing safety or mobility. FTA has developed a program circular addressing environmental justice in transit projects, Circular 4703.1, Environmental Justice Policy Guidance for Federal Transit Administration Recipients. The Circular is designed to provide a framework to assist recipients as they integrate principles of environmental justice into their transit decision-making process. The Circular contains recommendations for State DOTs, MPOs, and transit providers on (1) how to fully engage environmental justice populations in the transportation decision-making process; (2) how to determine whether environmental justice populations would be subjected to disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of a public transportation project, policy, or activity; and (3) how to avoid, minimize, or mitigate these effects. This rule will not cause adverse environmental impacts, and as a result, minority populations and low-income populations will not be disproportionately impacted. Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property) This rule will not affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform) This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children) FTA has analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. FTA certifies that this rule will not cause an environmental risk to health or safety that may disproportionately affect children. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation) FTA has analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13175 (Nov. 6, 2000), and has determined that it will not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes; will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal governments; and will not preempt tribal laws. Therefore, a tribal summary impact statement is not required. Notwithstanding the above, FTA notes that it conducted extensive outreach with tribes throughout this rulemaking. Specifically, on February 12, 2016, FTA conducted public outreach for tribes and hosted a Tribal Technical Assistance Workshop wherein FTA presented its proposed rule and responded to numerous technical questions from tribes. FTA subsequently delivered the same presentation during a webinar series open to all members of the public on February 24, March 1, March 2, and March 3. On March 7, FTA delivered the same presentation at an outreach session hosted by the National Rural Transit Assistance Program, which also was open to all members of the public. During each of these public outreach sessions and the public webinar series, FTA received and responded to numerous technical questions regarding the NPRM. FTA recorded the presentations, including the question and answer sessions, and made available the following documents on the public docket for this rulemaking (Docket FTA–2015–0021): (1) FTA’s PowerPoint Presentation from the public outreach sessions and public webinar series (https:// www.regulations.gov/document?D=FTA- 2015-0021-0012); (2) a written transcript of FTA’s public webinar of March 1, 2016 (https://www.regulations.gov/ document?D=FTA-2015-0021-0010); (3) a consolidated list of every Question and FTA Answer from the public outreach sessions and public webinar series (https://www.regulations.gov/ document?D=FTA-2015-0021-0041); and (4) the results of polling questions from FTA’s public outreach sessions (https://www.regulations.gov/ document?D=FTA-2015-0021-0011). FTA also uploaded onto YouTube an audiovisual recording of its webinar VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34465 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations from March 1, 2016. The video is available at the following link: https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBj5HRa twGA&feature=youtu.be. FTA also notes that, in advance of publishing an NPRM, FTA sought comment from the transit industry, including tribes, on a wide range of topics pertaining to safety and asset management through an ANPRM. In the NPRM, FTA asked specific questions about how today’s rule should apply to tribal recipients and subrecipients of Section 5311 funds. In light of the comments that FTA received from tribes in response to the NPRM, and in an effort to further reduce the burdens of this final rule, FTA is deferring regulatory action regarding the applicability of this rule to operators of public transportation systems that only receive Section 5310 and/or Section 5311 funds, including tribal transit operators. FTA is deferring action pending further evaluation of information and safety data to determine the appropriate level of regulatory burden necessary to address the safety risk presented by these operators. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects) FTA has analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). FTA has determined that this rule is not a significant energy action under that Executive Order because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, a Statement of Energy Effects is not required. Privacy Act Any individual is able to search the electronic form of all comments received on any FTA docket by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, or other entity). You may review USDOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477). Statutory/Legal Authority for This Rulemaking FTA is issuing this final rule under the authority of section 20021 of MAP– 21, which requires public transportation agencies to develop and implement comprehensive safety plans. This authority was reauthorized under the FAST Act. The authority is codified at 49 U.S.C. 5329(d). Regulation Identification Number A RIN is assigned to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. The RIN set forth in the heading of this document can be used to cross-reference this action with the Unified Agenda. List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 673 Mass transportation, Safety. K. Jane Williams, Acting Administrator. ■For the reasons set forth in the preamble, and under the authority of 49 U.S.C. 5329(d) and 5334, and the delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.91, FTA hereby amends Chapter VI of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations by adding part 673 to read as follows: PART 673—PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AGENCY SAFETY PLANS Subpart A—General 673.1 Applicability. 673.3 Policy. 673.5 Definitions. Subpart B—Safety Plans 673.11 General requirements. 673.13 Certification of compliance. 673.15 Coordination with metropolitan, statewide, and non-metropolitan planning processes. Subpart C—Safety Management Systems 673.21 General requirements. 673.23 Safety management policy. 673.25 Safety risk management. 673.27 Safety assurance. 673.29 Safety promotion. Subpart D—Safety Plan Documentation and Recordkeeping 673.31 Safety plan documentation. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5329(d) and 5334; 49 CFR 1.91. Subpart A—General §673.1 Applicability. (a) This part applies to any State, local governmental authority, and any other operator of a public transportation system that receives Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53. (b) This part does not apply to an operator of a public transportation system that only receives Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5310, 49 U.S.C. 5311, or both 49 U.S.C. 5310 and 49 U.S.C. 5311. §673.3 Policy. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has adopted the principles and methods of Safety Management Systems (SMS) as the basis for enhancing the safety of public transportation in the United States. FTA will follow the principles and methods of SMS in its development of rules, regulations, policies, guidance, best practices, and technical assistance administered under the authority of 49 U.S.C. 5329. This part sets standards for the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan, which will be responsive to FTA’s Public Transportation Safety Program, and reflect the specific safety objectives, standards, and priorities of each transit agency. Each Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan will incorporate SMS principles and methods tailored to the size, complexity, and scope of the public transportation system and the environment in which it operates. §673.5 Definitions. As used in this part: Accident means an Event that involves any of the following: A loss of life; a report of a serious injury to a person; a collision of public transportation vehicles; a runaway train; an evacuation for life safety reasons; or any derailment of a rail transit vehicle, at any location, at any time, whatever the cause. Accountable Executive means a single, identifiable person who has ultimate responsibility for carrying out the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan of a public transportation agency; responsibility for carrying out the agency’s Transit Asset Management Plan; and control or direction over the human and capital resources needed to develop and maintain both the agency’s Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5329(d), and the agency’s Transit Asset Management Plan in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5326. Chief Safety Officer means an adequately trained individual who has responsibility for safety and reports directly to a transit agency’s chief executive officer, general manager, president, or equivalent officer. A Chief Safety Officer may not serve in other operational or maintenance capacities, unless the Chief Safety Officer is employed by a transit agency that is a small public transportation provider as defined in this part, or a public transportation provider that does not operate a rail fixed guideway public transportation system. Equivalent Authority means an entity that carries out duties similar to that of a Board of Directors, for a recipient or subrecipient of FTA funds under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53, including sufficient authority to review and approve a VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34466 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations recipient or subrecipient’s Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan. Event means any Accident, Incident, or Occurrence. FTA means the Federal Transit Administration, an operating administration within the United States Department of Transportation. Hazard means any real or potential condition that can cause injury, illness, or death; damage to or loss of the facilities, equipment, rolling stock, or infrastructure of a public transportation system; or damage to the environment. Incident means an event that involves any of the following: A personal injury that is not a serious injury; one or more injuries requiring medical transport; or damage to facilities, equipment, rolling stock, or infrastructure that disrupts the operations of a transit agency. Investigation means the process of determining the causal and contributing factors of an accident, incident, or hazard, for the purpose of preventing recurrence and mitigating risk. National Public Transportation Safety Plan means the plan to improve the safety of all public transportation systems that receive Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53. Occurrence means an Event without any personal injury in which any damage to facilities, equipment, rolling stock, or infrastructure does not disrupt the operations of a transit agency. Operator of a public transportation system means a provider of public transportation as defined under 49 U.S.C. 5302(14). Performance measure means an expression based on a quantifiable indicator of performance or condition that is used to establish targets and to assess progress toward meeting the established targets. Performance target means a quantifiable level of performance or condition, expressed as a value for the measure, to be achieved within a time period required by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan means the documented comprehensive agency safety plan for a transit agency that is required by 49 U.S.C. 5329 and this part. Rail fixed guideway public transportation system means any fixed guideway system that uses rail, is operated for public transportation, is within the jurisdiction of a State, and is not subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Railroad Administration, or any such system in engineering or construction. Rail fixed guideway public transportation systems include but are not limited to rapid rail, heavy rail, light rail, monorail, trolley, inclined plane, funicular, and automated guideway. Rail transit agency means any entity that provides services on a rail fixed guideway public transportation system. Risk means the composite of predicted severity and likelihood of the potential effect of a hazard. Risk mitigation means a method or methods to eliminate or reduce the effects of hazards. Safety Assurance means processes within a transit agency’s Safety Management System that functions to ensure the implementation and effectiveness of safety risk mitigation, and to ensure that the transit agency meets or exceeds its safety objectives through the collection, analysis, and assessment of information. Safety Management Policy means a transit agency’s documented commitment to safety, which defines the transit agency’s safety objectives and the accountabilities and responsibilities of its employees in regard to safety. Safety Management System (SMS) means the formal, top-down, organization-wide approach to managing safety risk and assuring the effectiveness of a transit agency’s safety risk mitigation. SMS includes systematic procedures, practices, and policies for managing risks and hazards. Safety Management System (SMS) Executive means a Chief Safety Officer or an equivalent. Safety performance target means a Performance Target related to safety management activities. Safety Promotion means a combination of training and communication of safety information to support SMS as applied to the transit agency’s public transportation system. Safety risk assessment means the formal activity whereby a transit agency determines Safety Risk Management priorities by establishing the significance or value of its safety risks. Safety Risk Management means a process within a transit agency’s Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for identifying hazards and analyzing, assessing, and mitigating safety risk. Serious injury means any injury which: (1) Requires hospitalization for more than 48 hours, commencing within 7 days from the date of the injury was received; (2) Results in a fracture of any bone (except simple fractures of fingers, toes, or noses); (3) Causes severe hemorrhages, nerve, muscle, or tendon damage; (4) Involves any internal organ; or (5) Involves second- or third-degree burns, or any burns affecting more than 5 percent of the body surface. Small public transportation provider means a recipient or subrecipient of Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. 5307 that has one hundred (100) or fewer vehicles in peak revenue service and does not operate a rail fixed guideway public transportation system. State means a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands. State of good repair means the condition in which a capital asset is able to operate at a full level of performance. State Safety Oversight Agency means an agency established by a State that meets the requirements and performs the functions specified by 49 U.S.C. 5329(e) and the regulations set forth in 49 CFR part 674. Transit agency means an operator of a public transportation system. Transit Asset Management Plan means the strategic and systematic practice of procuring, operating, inspecting, maintaining, rehabilitating, and replacing transit capital assets to manage their performance, risks, and costs over their life cycles, for the purpose of providing safe, cost-effective, and reliable public transportation, as required by 49 U.S.C. 5326 and 49 CFR part 625. Subpart B—Safety Plans §673.11 General requirements. (a) A transit agency must, within one calendar year after July 19, 2019, establish a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan that meets the requirements of this part and, at a minimum, consists of the following elements: (1) The Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan, and subsequent updates, must be signed by the Accountable Executive and approved by the agency’s Board of Directors, or an Equivalent Authority. (2) The Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan must document the processes and activities related to Safety Management System (SMS) implementation, as required under subpart C of this part. (3) The Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan must include performance targets based on the safety performance measures established under the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. (4) The Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan must address all applicable requirements and standards as set forth in FTA’s Public Transportation Safety Program and the National Public Transportation Safety Plan. Compliance VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34467 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations with the minimum safety performance standards authorized under 49 U.S.C. 5329(b)(2)(C) is not required until standards have been established through the public notice and comment process. (5) Each transit agency must establish a process and timeline for conducting an annual review and update of the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan. (6) A rail transit agency must include or incorporate by reference in its Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan an emergency preparedness and response plan or procedures that addresses, at a minimum, the assignment of employee responsibilities during an emergency; and coordination with Federal, State, regional, and local officials with roles and responsibilities for emergency preparedness and response in the transit agency’s service area. (b) A transit agency may develop one Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for all modes of service, or may develop a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for each mode of service not subject to safety regulation by another Federal entity. (c) A transit agency must maintain its Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan in accordance with the recordkeeping requirements in subpart D of this part. (d) A State must draft and certify a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan on behalf of any small public transportation provider that is located in that State. A State is not required to draft a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan for a small public transportation provider if that agency notifies the State that it will draft its own plan. In each instance, the transit agency must carry out the plan. If a State drafts and certifies a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan on behalf of a transit agency, and the transit agency later opts to draft and certify its own Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan, then the transit agency must notify the State. The transit agency has one year from the date of the notification to draft and certify a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan that is compliant with this part. The Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan drafted by the State will remain in effect until the transit agency drafts its own Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan. (e) Any rail fixed guideway public transportation system that had a System Safety Program Plan compliant with 49 CFR part 659 as of October 1, 2012, may keep that plan in effect until one year after July 19, 2019. (f) Agencies that operate passenger ferries regulated by the United States Coast Guard (USCG) or rail fixed guideway public transportation service regulated by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) are not required to develop agency safety plans for those modes of service. §673.13 Certification of compliance. (a) Each transit agency, or State as authorized in §673.11(d), must certify that it has established a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan meeting the requirements of this part one year after July 19, 2019. A State Safety Oversight Agency must review and approve a Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan developed by rail fixed guideway system, as authorized in 49 U.S.C. 5329(e) and its implementing regulations at 49 CFR part 674. (b) On an annual basis, a transit agency, direct recipient, or State must certify its compliance with this part. §673.15 Coordination with metropolitan, statewide, and non-metropolitan planning processes. (a) A State or transit agency must make its safety performance targets available to States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations to aid in the planning process. (b) To the maximum extent practicable, a State or transit agency must coordinate with States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations in the selection of State and MPO safety performance targets. Subpart C—Safety Management Systems §673.21 General requirements. Each transit agency must establish and implement a Safety Management System under this part. A transit agency Safety Management System must be appropriately scaled to the size, scope and complexity of the transit agency and include the following elements: (a) Safety Management Policy as described in §673.23; (b) Safety Risk Management as described in §673.25; (c) Safety Assurance as described in §673.27; and (d) Safety Promotion as described in §673.29. §673.23 Safety management policy. (a) A transit agency must establish its organizational accountabilities and responsibilities and have a written statement of safety management policy that includes the agency’s safety objectives. (b) A transit agency must establish and implement a process that allows employees to report safety conditions to senior management, protections for employees who report safety conditions to senior management, and a description of employee behaviors that may result in disciplinary action. (c) The safety management policy must be communicated throughout the agency’s organization. (d) The transit agency must establish the necessary authorities, accountabilities, and responsibilities for the management of safety amongst the following individuals within its organization, as they relate to the development and management of the transit agency’s Safety Management System (SMS): (1) Accountable Executive. The transit agency must identify an Accountable Executive. The Accountable Executive is accountable for ensuring that the agency’s SMS is effectively implemented, throughout the agency’s public transportation system. The Accountable Executive is accountable for ensuring action is taken, as necessary, to address substandard performance in the agency’s SMS. The Accountable Executive may delegate specific responsibilities, but the ultimate accountability for the transit agency’s safety performance cannot be delegated and always rests with the Accountable Executive. (2) Chief Safety Officer or Safety Management System (SMS) Executive. The Accountable Executive must designate a Chief Safety Officer or SMS Executive who has the authority and responsibility for day-to-day implementation and operation of an agency’s SMS. The Chief Safety Officer or SMS Executive must hold a direct line of reporting to the Accountable Executive. A transit agency may allow the Accountable Executive to also serve as the Chief Safety Officer or SMS Executive. (3) Agency leadership and executive management. A transit agency must identify those members of its leadership or executive management, other than an Accountable Executive, Chief Safety Officer, or SMS Executive, who have authorities or responsibilities for day-to- day implementation and operation of an agency’s SMS. (4) Key staff. A transit agency may designate key staff, groups of staff, or committees to support the Accountable Executive, Chief Safety Officer, or SMS Executive in developing, implementing, and operating the agency’s SMS. §673.25 Safety risk management. (a) Safety Risk Management process. A transit agency must develop and implement a Safety Risk Management process for all elements of its public transportation system. The Safety Risk VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 34468 Federal Register /Vol. 83, No. 139/Thursday, July 19, 2018/Rules and Regulations Management process must be comprised of the following activities: Safety hazard identification, safety risk assessment, and safety risk mitigation. (b) Safety hazard identification. (1) A transit agency must establish methods or processes to identify hazards and consequences of the hazards. (2) A transit agency must consider, as a source for hazard identification, data and information provided by an oversight authority and the FTA. (c) Safety risk assessment. (1) A transit agency must establish methods or processes to assess the safety risks associated with identified safety hazards. (2) A safety risk assessment includes an assessment of the likelihood and severity of the consequences of the hazards, including existing mitigations, and prioritization of the hazards based on the safety risk. (d) Safety risk mitigation. A transit agency must establish methods or processes to identify mitigations or strategies necessary as a result of the agency’s safety risk assessment to reduce the likelihood and severity of the consequences. §673.27 Safety assurance. (a) Safety assurance process. A transit agency must develop and implement a safety assurance process, consistent with this subpart. A rail fixed guideway public transportation system, and a recipient or subrecipient of Federal financial assistance under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 that operates more than one hundred vehicles in peak revenue service, must include in its safety assurance process each of the requirements in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section. A small public transportation provider only must include in its safety assurance process the requirements in paragraph (b) of this section. (b) Safety performance monitoring and measurement. A transit agency must establish activities to: (1) Monitor its system for compliance with, and sufficiency of, the agency’s procedures for operations and maintenance; (2) Monitor its operations to identify any safety risk mitigations that may be ineffective, inappropriate, or were not implemented as intended; (3) Conduct investigations of safety events to identify causal factors; and (4) Monitor information reported through any internal safety reporting programs. (c) Management of change. (1) A transit agency must establish a process for identifying and assessing changes that may introduce new hazards or impact the transit agency’s safety performance. (2) If a transit agency determines that a change may impact its safety performance, then the transit agency must evaluate the proposed change through its Safety Risk Management process. (d) Continuous improvement. (1) A transit agency must establish a process to assess its safety performance. (2) If a transit agency identifies any deficiencies as part of its safety performance assessment, then the transit agency must develop and carry out, under the direction of the Accountable Executive, a plan to address the identified safety deficiencies. §673.29 Safety promotion. (a) Competencies and training. A transit agency must establish and implement a comprehensive safety training program for all agency employees and contractors directly responsible for safety in the agency’s public transportation system. The training program must include refresher training, as necessary. (b) Safety communication. A transit agency must communicate safety and safety performance information throughout the agency’s organization that, at a minimum, conveys information on hazards and safety risks relevant to employees’ roles and responsibilities and informs employees of safety actions taken in response to reports submitted through an employee safety reporting program. Subpart D—Safety Plan Documentation and Recordkeeping §673.31 Safety plan documentation. At all times, a transit agency must maintain documents that set forth its Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan, including those related to the implementation of its Safety Management System (SMS), and results from SMS processes and activities. A transit agency must maintain documents that are included in whole, or by reference, that describe the programs, policies, and procedures that the agency uses to carry out its Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan. These documents must be made available upon request by the Federal Transit Administration or other Federal entity, or a State Safety Oversight Agency having jurisdiction. A transit agency must maintain these documents for a minimum of three years after they are created. [FR Doc. 2018–15167 Filed 7–18–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:39 Jul 18, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JYR2.SGM 19JYR2sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES2 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00601 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-L REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:GREGORY A. BARFIELD, Director Department of Transportation BY:BRIAN BARR, Assistant Director Department of Transportation ORIE J. RUBALCAVA, Senior Management Analyst Department of Transportation SUBJECT Approve the consultant agreement with Element Markets, a Texas based Limited Liability Company, for the supply of Renewable Natural Gas and Management of Low Carbon Fuel Standard and Renewable Identification Number credits (Proposal No. 9509) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the consultant agreement with Element Markets,a Texas based Limited Liability Company (LLC),for the supply of Renewable Natural Gas (RNG)and Management of (Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS)and Renewable Identification Number (RIN)credits for the Department of Transportation/FAX Division. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The United States federal government and the State of California have established fuel standard programs that permit organizations to accumulate carbon credits when using fuels in vehicles that reduce carbon emissions.These credits can be sold within the market exchange.The Department of Transportation/FAX Division seeks approval to award a professional consulting agreement for the management of LCFS and RIN credits.The consultant will be responsible for maintaining the RNG fuel pathway with the California Air Resource Board (CARB),keeping and reporting a record of quarterly and annual therms used in FAX operation,and monetizing credits for delivery of revenue to FAX.The revenue generated from this procurement is estimated at $300,000 per quarter and $1.2 million per year, subject to market conditions. BACKGROUND City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00601 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-L The United States federal government and the State of California have established fuel standard programs designed to lower greenhouse gas emission by reducing the full fuel-cycle carbon intensity of transportation fuels.The means and method this is achieved differs between the two programs; however,both allow for entities that use carbon reducing fuels to collect credits,which can be sold on an open market to other entities needing additional credits to satisfy their annual requirements to the respective government agency. FAX currently uses approximately 2.8 million therms of Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)per year for revenue and non-revenue vehicles and seeks to utilize a vendor to replace this fuel source with RNG, which has a lower carbon intensity.This will permit FAX to accumulate more LCFS credits and benefit from RIN credits,all of which will generate revenue for the department.Proposals were solicited for this project on September 27,2019,and advertised in the Fresno Business Journal and Mass Transit Magazine.The Request for Proposals was sent to five building exchanges and specifications were distributed to 15 potential bidders.The bids were publicly opened on November 5,2019.FAX received five bids in response to the solicitation,and the selection committee determined Element Markets LLC provided the best value to the City of Fresno. The City Attorney has reviewed the Agreement and approved it to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378 the award of this contract does not qualify as a project;therefore,it is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act requirements. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented because federal conditions preclude the use of local preference. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to the General Fund from this request.The revenue generated from this procurement is estimated at $300,000 per quarter and $1.2 million per year,subject to market conditions. Attachments: Bid Eval 9509 Agreement City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ EXECUTION COPY SOLICITATION 9509 MASTER DISPENSING AGREEMENT This Master Dispensing Agreement (the "Master Agreement"), dated as of May _, 2020, (the "Effective Date"), is entered into by and between Element Markets Renewable Energy, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company located at 3555 Timmons Lane, Suite 900, Houston, Texas 77027 ("EMRE") and the City of Fresno (the "City"), a California municipal corporation located at 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, California 93721. Each of EMRE and the City may be referred to herein as a "Party" and collectively as the "Parties". Unless stated otherwise, capitalized terms utilized herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in Article 1. RECITALS WHEREAS, EMRE is a marketer of Renewable Natural Gas (also referred to as RNG and defined below) and the Renewable Fuel Credits (defined below) generated from the use of RNG as Vehicle Fuel (defined below); WHEREAS, the City dispenses compressed natural Gas ("CNG") using natural Gas extracted from a natural Gas pipeline at its compression facilities as Vehicle Fuel for its fleet of transportation vehicles; WHEREAS, each of EMRE and the City desire to enter into one or more transactions to convert RNG delivered by EMRE via exchange to the City into compressed RNG ("Bio-CNG") to be dispensed as Vehicle Fuel at the Facilities pursuant to the Transaction Confirmation; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, EMRE will generate RJNs and LCFS Credits for Bio-CNG used as Vehicle Fuel and share the revenue from the RINs and LCFS Credits as set forth in the Transaction Confirmation; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereto agree as follows: ARTICLE I. DEFINITIONS The following terms have the meanings specified or referred to in this Article I: Actual Production: defined in Section 2.0l(d). Agreement: refers to this Master Agreement, the Transaction Confirmation and the City Terms and Conditions. Applicable Program means any one or both of the RFS and LCFS. Bio-CNG: defined in the Recitals. Business Day: any day except Saturday, Sunday or any other day on which commercial banks located in Houston, Texas or Fresno, California are authorized or required by Law to be closed for business. CARB: means the California Air Resources Board. Change in Law: defined in Section 3.06 of this Master Agreement. 1 EXECUTION COPY SOLICITATION 9509 City Terms and Conditions: that certain Agreement for Management of LCFS/RIN Credit Programs and Supply ofRNG, executed by and between the Parties as of the Effective Date, and incorporated as Addendum 2 to this Agreement. CNG: defined in the Recitals. Delivery Period: defined in the Transaction Confirmation. Dispensed Bio-CNG: defined in Section 2.0l(c). Dispensing Fee: defined in the Transaction Confirmation. Dollars or$: the lawful currency of the United States. Effective Date: defined in the preamble to this Master Agreement. Environmental Attributes: means any and all attributes, including the avoidance of Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions, that are (i) associated with the use ofRNG as Vehicle Fuel and (ii) required to generate a RIN and LCFS Credit when RNG is used as Vehicle Fuel, including any and all reporting rights associated therewith. EPA: the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or its successor agency. Facility or Facilities: the City's compression facilities listed on Appendix A to the Transaction Confirmation, as updated by the Parties from time to time. Force Majeure: any cause not reasonably within the control of the Party claiming suspension, including, but not limited to, the following: (i) physical events such as acts of God, landslides, lightning, earthquakes, fires, storms or storm warnings, such as hurricanes, which result in evacuation of the affected area, floods, washouts, explosions, breakage or accident or necessity of repairs to machinery or equipment or lines of pipe; (ii) weather related events affecting an entire geographic region, such as low temperatures which cause freezing or failure of wells or lines of pipe; (iii) interruption and/or curtailment of firm transportation and/or storage by transporters; (iv) acts of others such as strikes, lockouts or other industrial disturbances, riots, sabotage, insurrections or wars, or acts of terror; and (v) governmental actions such as necessity for compliance with any court order, law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or policy having the effect of law promulgated by a governmental authority having jurisdiction. Fossil LCFS Credits: the LCFS Credits that would have been generated if a quantity of Dispensed Bio-CNG was instead CNG produced from fossil or conventional natural Gas, determined using the applicable CNG pathway for non-renewable natural gas. To the extent the applicable CNG pathway for non-renewable natural gas generates a deficit under the LCFS (as opposed to an LCFS Credit), the number of Fossil LCFS Credits with respect to the Dispensed Bio-CNG is deemed to be zero. Gas: any mixture of hydrocarbons and noncombustible gases in a gaseous state consisting primarily of methane, including natural gas, as well as other types of gas, such as biogas produced from animal waste, agricultural waste, landfill gas or digester gas, that is cleaned to pipeline quality and injected into the pipeline system, in each case excluding any Environmental Attributes associated therewith. 2 EXECUTION COPY SOLICITATION 9509 Greenhouse Gas: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N20), hydroflourocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulphur hexafluoride, or any other substances or combination of substances that are or may become regulated or designated as Greenhouse Gases under any federal, state or local law or regulation, or any emission reduction registry, trading system, or reporting or reduction program for Greenhouse Gas emission reductions that is established, certified, maintained, or recognized by any international, governmental (including federal, state, or local agencies), or non-governmental agency from time to time, in each case measured in increments of one metric tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent. Incremental LCFS Credits: the number of LCFS Credits generated from a quantity of Dispensed Bio-CNG that exceed the number of Fossil LCFS Credits attributable to the Dispensed Bio-CNG. Law: any U.S. statute, law, ordinance, regulation, rule, code, order, constitution, treaty, common law, judgment, decree, other requirement or rule of law of any governmental authority. LCFS or Low Carbon Fuel Standard: the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard administered by CARB set forth in the California Code of Regulations at Title 17, Section 95480 et seq ., as amended, restated or supplemented to date. LCFS Credits: credits generated and traded under the LCFS, with each credit equal to one metric ton of carbon dioxide reductions as compared to the baseline CO2 emissions under the LCFS. Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions: the aggregate quantity of Greenhouse Gas emissions (including direct emissions and significant indirect emissions from land use changes), as determined by the EPA or CARB, related to the full fuel lifecycle, including all stages of fuel and feedstock production and distribution, from feedstock generation or extraction through the distribution and delivery and use of the finished fuel to the ultimate consumer, where the mass values for all greenhouse gases are adjusted to account for their relative global warming potential. Master Agreement: defined in the preamble. Person: an individual, corporation, partnership,joint venture, limited liability company, governmental authority, unincorporated organization, trust, association or other entity. Q-RIN: a RlN that has been reviewed and validated by an approved QAP provider. QAP: a registered Quality Assurance Plan under the Renewable Fuel Standard. Renewable Fuel: has the meaning ascribed to "renewable fuel" in §80.1401 of the RFS. Renewable Fuel Standard, RFS or RFS2: the renewable energy program and policies established by the Environmental Protection Agency and set forth in Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Changes to Renewable Fuel Standard Program, published on March 26,2010 at 75 Fed. Reg. 14670 and codified at 40 C.F.R. § 80.1425 (2011), 40 C.F.R. § 80.1426 (2012), as amended, restated or supplemented to date. Renewable Identification Number or RIN: a unique number generated under RFS2 to represent a volume of Renewable Fuel used, directly or indirectly, as Vehicle Fuel. 3 EXECUTION COPY SOLICITATION 9509 Renewable Natural Gas or RNG: means a mixture of hydrocarbons that is a gas at 60 degrees Fahrenheit and l atmosphere of pressure that (i) is produced through the anaerobic digestion of organic matter, (ii) is processed at a landfill or anaerobic digestion facility registered or eligible to be registered as a biogas production facility under the RFS, (iii) meets the applicable quality standards of the relevant pipeline and (iv) includes all associated Environmental Attributes. Term: defined in Section 5.0l(a) of this Master Agreement. Tracking System: a system established pursuant to the RFS or LCFS, as applicable, by which the EPA or CARB records and facilitates the generation, ownership and transfer of RINs or LCFS Credits, as applicable, including (without limitation), the EPA Moderated Transaction System (EMTS) for RINs and the LCFS Reporting Tool (LRT) for LCFS Credits. Transaction Confirmation: that certain Transaction Confirmation No. 1, executed by and between the Parties as of the Effective Date, attached as Addendum 1 to this Master Agreement. Transportation Credits: means one or both ofRINs and LCFS Credits, as applicable. Vehicle Fuel: fuel for transportation vehicles. ARTICLE II. DISPENSING; DISPENSING FEE Section 2.01 Dispensing and other Obligations of the Parties. (a) At least ten (10) Business Days prior to the first day of each month of the Delivery Period (as defined in the applicable Transaction Confirmation), the City will provide EMRE with a non- binding estimate of the amount of CNG to be dispensed at the Facilities, based on historical usage provided to EMRE upon request. (b) EMRE will deliver Environmental Attributes to the City during each month of the Delivery Period, as defined in the Transaction Confirmation. Following receipt of Environmental Attributes, the City will bundle the Environmental Attributes with Gas extracted from a natural Gas pipeline at the Facilities to effect delivery of the RNG to the Facilities via exchange. Delivery, receipt and bundling of Environmental Attributes with Gas are deemed to occur sequentially immediately prior to processing of the equivalent quantity ofRNG into Bio-CNG. (c) The City will convert the RNG received pursuant to clause (b) above to Bio-CNG at the Facilities and dispense the resulting Bio-CNG at the Facilities as Vehicle Fuel (the "Dispensed Bio-CNG"). The City agrees not to use Bio-CNG or RNG for parasitic load at the Facilities. (d) On or before the seventh day following the end of each month of the Delivery Period or upon receipt of the underlying billing statement, if later, the City will notify EMRE of the actual Gas procurement and associated Bio-CNG production of the Facilities (the "Actual Production"). ( e) Foil owing receipt of Actual Production and prior to the end of the month following delivery of the Environmental Attributes to the City, EMRE will provide the City with evidence of delivery of the Environmental Attributes by providing the City with an affidavit in the form attached as Exhibit A for such Environmental Attributes, as such form may be updated from time to time, 4 EXECUTION COPY SOLICITATION 9509 along with all supporting documentation referenced in such affidavit (the "Environmental Supplier Affidavit"). (f) Within five Business Days following receipt of the Environmental Attribute Supplier Affidavit, the City will evidence the bundling of the delivered Environmental Attributes with Gas, compression of the RNG into Bio-CNG and dispensing of the Dispensed Bio-CNG by providing EMRE with the affidavit attached as Exhibit B and all supporting documentation referenced therein (the "Transportation Fuel Affidavit") including, without limitation, all records relating to (i) the purchase of Gas, (ii) the conversion of the bundled RNG into Bio- CNG and (iii) dispensing of the Dispensed Bio-CNG. (g) In the event a third party performs any of EMRE's obligations with respect to supply of Environmental Attributes or generation ofRINs, any references to "EMRE" herein with respect to such obligations including, without limitation, responsibility for required affidavits or documentation, will instead refer to such third party; provided that EMRE shall remain fully responsible for its obligations hereunder in all respects, including with respect to indemnification of the City, notwithstanding delegation of performance to a third party. (h) EMRE agrees to only supply the City with Environmental Attributes from biogas production facilities registered as producers of "Renewable Fuel" under the RFS. (i) Failure by the City to provide EMRE with an accurate and complete Transportation Fuel Affidavit shall excuse EMRE from its obligation to pay the City any portion of the Dispensing Fee attributable to the Transportation Credits to which the applicable Transportation Fuel Affidavit relates. Section 2.02 Fees. In return for performance of the obligations of the City, the City will receive the Dispensing Fee set forth in the Transaction Confirmation. For the avoidance of doubt, no Dispensing Fee will be payable unless and until (i) Transportation Credits are generated from Dispensed Bio-CNG, (ii) the Transportation Credits generated from the Dispensed Bio-CNG are sold by EMRE or its designee, and (iii) proceeds are received by EMRE from such sale(s). Section 2.03 Reporting. When a payment of the Dispensing Fee is made to the City, EMRE will provide the City with a report indicating the Transportation Credits to which the payment relates and the sales price of such Transportation Credits. EMRE will also provide the City with a report of the Transportation Credits generated from the Dispensed Bio-CNG each month (or quarter, in the case of LCFS Credits) of the Delivery Period. ARTICLE III. OBLIGATIONS FOLLOWING DELIVERY OF ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTES; GENERATION OF RINS AND LCFS CREDITS Section 3.01 Generation of RINs and LCFS Credits. Following receipt from the City of documentation sufficient to evidence production of the Bio-CNG and dispensing of Dispensed Bio- CNG, including the Transportation Fuel Affidavit, EMRE or its designee will generate, based upon the Dispensed Bio-CNG, (i) RINs for each month of the Delivery Period and (ii) LCFS Credits for each calendar quarter of the Delivery Period. 5 EXECUTION COPY SOLICITATION 9509 Section 3.02 Further Assurances; Affidavits; Marketing. (a) Each Party will provide the other Party with such cooperation, additional documentation , affidavits , certifications or other information as may be reasonably necessary to carry out the purposes of this Agreement (including pursuant to any audit of a Transaction Confirmation by a governmental authority). Each of the City and EMRE agree to perform, and to cause any representatives or agents performing on behalf of such Party to perform , its respective obligations hereunder in accordance with the RFS , the LCFS and any other applicable statutes, rules or regulations. Additional documentation includes , without limitation, evidence of (i) the production ofRNG, (ii) that such RNG was converted into Bio-CNG, and (iii) the dispensing of Dispensed Bio-CNG. (b) EMRE and the City agree to work together (and with the authorized agents or service providers of the other Party , as applicable) in good faith to ensure that each Party 's daily operations with respect to the RNG , Bio-CNG and Dispensed Bio-CNG comply with necessary standards and procedures for generating Transportation Credits , including , but not limited to, requirements within transportation , storage , processing, shipping, sales and use documentation and recordkeeping of RNG volumes produced, RNG converted to Bio-CNG at each Facility and Dispensed Bio-CNG. ( c) Each Party will , and will cause any affiliate performing any of its obligations hereunder to , comply with reasonable governmental agency requests related to Transportation Credits to the extent d irectly related to its obligations herein. (d) EMRE agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to have the RINs generated from use of the Dispensed Bio-CNG reviewed by a QAP provider. Section 3.03 RIN and LCFS Credit Sales and Marketing . The price at which an y Transportation Credits generated from Dispensed Bio-CNG are sold by EMRE, and the timing of any sale thereof, will be determined in EMRE 's discretion , subject to EMRE 's commercially reasonable efforts to monetize the Transportation Credits. The Transportation Credits generated hereunder will be tracked to the sales agreement under which such Transportation Credits are sold to ensure that the revenue used to calculate the Dispensing Fee hereunder is the actual gross revenue rece ived for such Transportation Credits. Section 3.04 Usage Data; Records. (a) Each Party , as applicable, will prov ide to the other copies of any and all documentation required by the EPA, CARB or a QAP provider or ve r ifi er under either the RFS or LCFS , as applicable , to (i) evidence that the RNG qualifies for RIN generation under RFS2 , (ii) establish and maintain a low carbon inten sity pathway for generation of Incremental LCFS Credits and (iii) evidence that the RNG is converted to Bio-CNG and the quantity of Dispensed Bio-CNG. This documentation will include , but is not limited to , all documentation , affidavits or reports required to certify that production and the delivery of the RNG from its point of production at the applicable Delivery Point is compliant with the transportation routing requirements 6 EXECUTION COPY SOLICITATION 9509 ("pathing") of the RFS or LCFS, as applicable, and any documentation required following delivery of Environmental Attributes to the City under the RFS or LCFS and evidence that the registration and reporting requirements, as outlined by 40 C.F.R. §80.1450, §80.1454, or §80.1426, each as amended to date, are met. (b) The City shall maintain, or cause to be maintained, and ensure the accuracy of, all records relating to (i) the purchase of Gas by the City, (ii) the receipt of Environmental Attributes from EMRE under the Agreement, (iii) the bundling of the Environmental Attributes with Gas purchased by the City, (iv) the production of Bio-CNG, and (v) the dispensing of Dispensed Bio-CNG. Such records include, without limitation, a completed Transportation Fuel Affidavit and any other documentation that may be required under the RFS or LCFS, as applicable. Such documentation shall be maintained for a period of ten years from generation of such data or documentation, as applicable. ( c) EMRE shall maintain all records relevant to the production, purchase, sale and delivery of the Environmental Attributes to the City related to the generation and sale of RINs and LCFS Credits and shall provide such documents to the City promptly upon reasonable request. Such records include, without limitation, an affidavit in the form of Appendix A to this Master Agreement with respect to the Environmental Attributes provided to the City during each month or quarter (in the case of LCFS Credits) of the Delivery Period. Section 3.05 Reporting. Each Party shall facilitate access for the other Party or its relevant agents to any and all records relevant to Bio-CNG, Dispensed Bio-CNG, and the resulting RINs and LCFS Credits generated and sold for any portion of the Delivery Period upon the reasonable request of such other Party, subject to any applicable confidentiality obligations. Section 3.06 Market Interruption; Change in Law. (a) any (x) action or inaction of the EPA, CARB or any other administrative or executive, legislative or judicial action, inaction, process, rule, notice, order, ruling or decree or (y) change in applicable law, rule or regulation, or the interpretation of an existing law, rule or regulation ( each, a "Change in Law") that: (i) Suspends indefinitely or terminates the Applicable Program, each of EMRE and the City shall have the right to suspend or terminate this Agreement or any Transaction Confirmation by providing written notice to the other Party of such termination; (ii) Results in or otherwise contributes to an interruption in either the RIN market or LCFS market, as applicable, EMRE shall have the right to suspend or terminate this Agreement or any Transaction Confirmation by providing written notice to the City of such termination; and (iii) Disallows or renders any means or aspect of performance of this Agreement unlawful, the affected Party may terminate this Agreement by providing written notice of termination to the other Party. (b) Any notice of termination pursuant to this Section 3 .06 must be received within 30 calendar 7 EXECUTION COPY SOLICITATION 9509 days of the event resulting in such termination or the party's receipt of notice of such event, as applicable. ( c) In the event of termination pursuant to this Section 3 .06, neither EMRE nor the City shall have any obligation or liability to any other party associated or in connection with, or in any way arising out of, such termination, except with respect to any RNG delivered to the City prior to termination of this Agreement. Section 3.07 Fuel Reporting Entity Status; Covenant. The City acknowledges and agrees that EMRE will be classified as an opt-in fuel reporting entity under Section 95483.1 of the LCFS with respect to all Dispensed Bio-CNG (including, for the avoidance of doubt, the non-renewable component of such Dispensed Bio-CNG) and will be the generator of LCFS Credits for the applicable Dispensed Bio-CNG. All LCFS Credits generated from Dispensed Bio-CNG will belong to EMRE; provided that EMRE will promptly remit to the City the Dispensing Fee as specified in the Transaction Confirmation. The City will not generate any RINs or LCFS Credits associated with any Dispensed Bio-CNG hereunder. Section 3.08 Obligation of Agents. Each Party acknowledges and agrees that any and all obligations of the Parties to provide information, data, documentation or other cooperation to the other Party are also applicable to an agent of the other Party in the event that such Party retains a service provider or other agent to perform any obligations under this Agreement. Section 3.09 Confidentiality. (a) Neither Party shall disclose, directly or indirectly, without the prior written consent of the other Party, the commercial terms of this Master Agreement or any Transaction Confirmation or any non-public data, information or other documentation provided by one Party to another under this Agreement (the "Confidential Information") to a third Party (other than the employees, contractors, lenders, owners, counsel, accountants and other agents of the Party, entities in which such Party has an ownership interest, prospective investors in a Party or prospective purchasers of all or substantially all of a Party's assets or of any rights under this Agreement, provided that to the extent any such persons do not have a professional or other legally binding obligation to maintain the confidentiality of such information, such persons shall have agreed to keep such terms confidential and provided further that such disclosing Party shall be liable to the other Party for breach of confidentiality by any such third party), except (i) in order to comply with any applicable law, order, regulation, or exchange rule, (ii) to the extent necessary for the enforcement of the Agreement, (iii) to the extent necessary in connection with the implementation or performance of any transaction, or (iv) to the extent necessary to comply with a regulatory agency's requirements, in each case to the extent confidential treatment is requested prior to or contemporaneously with disclosure. Each Party shall notify the other Party of any proceeding of which it is aware which may result in any unpermitted disclosure of Confidential Information and use reasonable efforts to prevent or limit the disclosure. The 8 EXECUTION COPY SOLICITATION 9509 existence of the Agreement is not subject to this confidentiality obligation. The Parties shall be entitled to all remedies available at law or in equity to enforce, or seek relief in connection with, this confidentiality obligation. The terms of any transaction hereunder shall be kept confidential by the Parties hereto for one year from the expiration of the transaction. (b) In the event that disclosure is required by a governmental body, applicable law or pursuant to the California Public Records Act, the Party subject to such requirement may disclose the material terms of this Agreement to the extent so required, but shall promptly notify the other Party, to the extent permitted by the governmental body or applicable law, prior to disclosure and shall cooperate (consistent with the disclosing Party's legal obligations) with the other Party's efforts to obtain protective orders or similar restraints with respect to such disclosure at the expense of the other Party. ARTICLE IV. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY Section 4.01 Limitation of Liability. IN NO EVENT WILL EITHER PARTY BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER PARTY FOR ANY CONSEQUENTIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, EXEMPLARY, SPECIAL, TREBLED, ENHANCED OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, LOST PROFITS, LOST BUSINESS OR OTHER COMMERCIAL OR EXPECTED ECONOMIC LOSS, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF BREACH OF CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE), ANY INDEMNITY OR OTHERWISE, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SUCH DAMAGE WAS FORESEEABLE AND WHETHER OR NOT SUCH PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES; PROVIDED THAT THE FOREGOING SHALL NOT PROHIBIT OR LIMIT (I) ANY RECOVERY OF DISPENSING FEES DUE UNDER THIS AGREEMENT FOLLOWING RECEIPT OF SALE PROCEEDS BY EMRE FOR RINS OR INCREMENT AL LCFS CREDITS GENERA TED FROM DISPENSED BIO-CNG, WHICH SHALL BE DEEMED DIRECT AND ACTUAL DAMAGES OR (II) CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATION TO INDEMNIFY THE CITY SET FORTH IN ADDENDUM 2 IN THE EVENT OF CONTRACTOR'S GROSS NEGLIGENCE OR WILLFUL MISCONDUCT. Section 4.02 Force Majeure. Neither Party shall be liable to the other for failure to perform an obligation, to the extent such failure was caused by Force Majeure. Neither party shall be entitled to the benefit of the provisions of Force Majeure to the extent performance is affected by any or all of the following circumstances: (i) the curtailment of interruptible or secondary firm transportation unless primary, in-path, firm transportation is also curtailed; (ii) the Party claiming excuse failed to remedy the condition and to resume the performance of such covenants or obligations with reasonable dispatch; or (iii) economic hardship; (iv) the loss of EMRE 's or the City's market(s), as applicable; or (v) the loss or failure of Gas or Environmental Attribute supplies or depletion of reserves, as applicable. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, the Parties agree that the settlement of strikes, lockouts or other industrial disturbances shall be within the sole discretion of the Party experiencing such disturbance. The party whose performance is prevented by Force Majeure must provide Notice to the other Party. 9 EXECUTION COPY SOLICITATION 9509 Initial notice may be given orally; however, written notice with reasonably full particulars of the event or occurrence is required as soon as reasonably practicable after the occurrence of the Force Majeure event. Upon providing written notice of Force Majeure to the other Party, the affected Party will be relieved of its obligation, from the onset of the Force Majeure event, to perform its obligations to the extent impeded by, and for the duration of, such event of Force Majeure, and neither Party shall be deemed to have failed in such obligations to the other Party during such occurrence or event. ARTICLE V. TERM; TERMINATION Section 5.01 Term. The term of this Agreement will begin on May _, 2020 and end on May _, 2023 (the "Initial Term"); provided that the term may be extended by mutual written agreement of the Parties for two (2) additional consecutive one (1) year terms (the Initial Term and any extension periods referred to as the "Term"), unless earlier terminated in accordance with this Agreement. Section 5.02 Termination. (a) Either Party may terminate this Agreement upon the commencement of a case under Title 11 of the United States Code or other similar insolvency law that is not cured within two (2) Business Days. (b) The City and EMRE reserve the right to terminate this Agreement for any reason, upon ninety (90) days' prior written notice to the respective Party. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent the City terminates this Agreement under this clause (b ), the City shall not begin negotiations with respect to the procurement of RNG for use as Bio-CNG with any other person prior to delivering notice of such termination to EMRE. ( c) Each Party also has the rights set forth in Section 6 of Addendum 2 with respect to termination of this Agreement. (d) Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the terms of this Agreement will remain in effect until the obligations of the Parties with respect to any Transaction Confirmation are fully performed or otherwise satisfied. ARTICLE VI. MISCELLANEOUS Section 6.01 Indirect and other Expenses. Except as may be expressly provided herein, all costs and expenses, including, without limitation, fees and disbursements of counsel, financial advisors and accountants, incurred in connection with this Agreement shall be paid by the Party incurring such costs and expenses. Section 6.02 Notices. All notices, requests, consents, claims, demands, waivers and other communications under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given (a) when delivered by hand (with written confirmation of receipt); (b) when received by the addressee if sent by a nationally recognized overnight courier (receipt requested); (c) on the date sent by facsimile or e-mail of a PDF document (with confirmation of transmission) if sent during normal business hours of the recipient, and on the next Business Day if sent after normal business hours of the recipient or ( d) on the third day after the date mailed, by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, EXECUTION COPY SOLICITATION 9509 postage prepaid. Such communications must be sent to the respective Parties at the following addresses ( or at such other address for a Party as shall be specified in a notice given in accordance with this Section 6.02): lfto EMRE: If to the City: Element Markets Renewable Energy, LLC 3555 Timmons Lane, Suite 900 Houston, TX 77027 Attn: RNG Operations Fax: (281) 207-7211 Email: BiogasOps@elementmarkets.com City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, California 93721 Attn: Sandra Gamez, Senior Procurement Specialist Fax: (559) 457-1265 Email: ---- Section 6.03 Headings. The headings in this Agreement are for reference only and shall not affect the interpretation of this Agreement. Section 6.04 Severability. If any term or prov1s1on of this Agreement is invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any jurisdiction, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other term or provision of this Agreement or invalidate or render unenforceable such term or provision in any other jurisdiction. Upon such determination that any term or other provision is invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the Parties hereto shall negotiate in good faith to modify this Agreement so as to effect the original intent of the Parties as closely as possible in a mutually acceptable manner in order that the transactions contemplated hereby be consummated as originally contemplated to the greatest extent possible. Section 6.05 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the sole and entire agreement of the Parties to this Agreement with respect to the subject matter contained herein, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous representations, warranties, understandings and agreements, both written and oral, with respect to such subject matter. Section 6.06 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective successors and permitted assigns. Except as provided in this Section 6.06, neither Party may assign its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other Party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. Notwithstanding the foregoing, assignment of this Agreement by EMRE is permitted without the consent of the City if (i) the assignee entity is controlled by or under common control with the assigning Party, (ii) the assigning Party can demonstrate that the same personnel will be responsible for executing this Agreement following such assignment and (iii) the assignee entity accepts all of rights and obligations under this Agreement. Following any assignment permitted under this Section 11 EXECUTION COPY SOLICITATION 9509 6.06, the assigning Party shall be released from any and all obligations or liabilities arising under, or relating to, this Agreement attributable to the period following the effective date of such assignment. Section 6.07 No Third-Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is for the sole benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective successors and permitted assigns and nothing herein, express or implied, is intended to or shall confer upon any other Person or entity any legal or equitable right, benefit or remedy of any nature whatsoever under or by reason of this Agreement. Section 6.08 Amendment and Modification; Waiver. This Agreement may only be amended, modified or supplemented by an agreement in writing signed by each Party hereto. No waiver by any Party of any of the provisions hereof shall be effective unless explicitly set forth in writing and signed by the Party so waiving. No waiver by any Party shall operate or be construed as a waiver in respect of any failure, breach or default not expressly identified by such written waiver, whether of a similar or different character, and whether occurring before or after that waiver. No failure to exercise, or delay in exercising, any right, remedy, power or privilege arising from this Agreement shall operate or be construed as a waiver thereof; nor shall any single or partial exercise of any right, remedy, power or privilege hereunder preclude any other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right, remedy, power or privilege. Section 6.09 Governing Law; Submission to Jurisdiction. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of California and where applicable, the County of Fresno, without giving effect to any choice or conflict of laws provision or rule (whether of the State of California or any other jurisdiction) that would permit or require the application of the laws of a different jurisdiction. Section 6.10 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall be deemed to be one and the same Agreement. A signed copy of this Agreement delivered by facsimile, e-mail or other means of electronic transmission shall be deemed to have the same legal effect as delivery of an original signed copy of this Agreement. [Sign.ature page follows} 12 APPENDIX A Environmental Attribute Supplier Affidavit AFFIDAVIT SOLICITATION 9509 The undersigned, _______ (name), _________ (title) and authorized signatory of Element Markets Renewable Energy, LLC ("EMRE"), being duly sworn, says the following: I am over the age of 18 and am a resident of the State of _____ . I have the legal capacity to make this affidavit and personal knowledge of the facts herein. MEM provided ____ MMBtu of Environmental Attributes to the City of Fresno (the "City") during the month of [MONTH] [YEAR] under that certain Master Dispensing Agreement, dated as of L__J, by and between EMRE and the City, and that certain Transaction Confirmation executed thereunder (together, the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this affidavit have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Agreement. The Environmental Attributes were produced through the conversion of organic matter at a landfill/waste disposal center, manure digester or sewage waste treatment facility into RNG. Such RNG produced by the landfill/waste disposal center, manure digester, or sewage waste treatment gas processing facility from which the Environmental Attributes were unbundled by EMRE consisted of a mixture of hydrocarbons that is a gas at 60 degrees Fahrenheit and 1 atmosphere of pressure. The Environmental Attributes have not been sold or transferred by EMRE to, or used by, any party other than the City in accordance with the Agreement. Documentation of the measurement and throughput delivery of such RNG, as well as the creation of the Environmental Attributes, is attached as Appendix 1 to this affidavit. I declare that, to the best of my knowledge and belief and under the penalty of perjury, the information herein is true, correct and complete. Executed this ___ day of ______ , 20_ Printed Name: -------------- * * * STATE OF ------- COUNTYOF ------- The foregoing affidavit was subscribed and sworn to before me on this ___ day of _____ _ 20_, by --------------------------~ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me. (Notary Seal) __________ (Notary Signature) 14 APPENDIXB Transportation Fuel Affidavit AFFIDAVIT SOLICITATION 9509 The undersigned, _______ (name), _________ (title) and authorized signatory of the City of Fresno (the "City"), being duly sworn, says the following: I am over the age of 18 and am a resident of the State of _____ . I have the legal capacity to make this affidavit and personal knowledge of the facts herein. The City procured and accepted delivery of ___ MMBtu of natural gas and bundled such natural gas with ___ MMBtu of Environmental Attributes received by the City from Element Markets Renewable Energy, LLC or its affiliate ("EMRE") in accordance with that certain Master Dispensing Agreement, dated as of April LJ, 2020 and the Transaction Confirmation executed thereunder (together, the "Agreement") to complete delivery of the RNG by EMRE to the City via exchange. Capitalized terms used and not otherwise defined in this affidavit have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Agreement. Documentation of the measurement and throughput delivery of such natural gas is attached as Appendix 1 to this affidavit. The __ MMBtu of RNG to which this affidavit relates consist of a mixture of hydrocarbons that is a gas at 60 degrees Fahrenheit and 1 atmosphere of pressure. The Environmental Attributes and resulting RNG (either prior to or following processing and including any right, title or interest in and thereto) was processed into Vehicle Fuel and dispensed as transportation vehicle fuel. Except as set forth in this Agreement , the City has not made, and will not make, any claim or assert any right to any Environmental Attribute or other environmental credit or attribute associated with the RNG or Vehicle Fuel , including , without limitation , RINs. f ] (MMBtu] of RNG were processed at a Facility and ___ GGEs (gasoline gallon equivalent) ofBio-CNG were produced. Documentation of the processing and dispensing ofBio-CNG as Vehicle Fuel is provided as Appendix 2 to this affidavit. I declare that, to the best of my knowledge and belief and under the penalty of perjury, the information herein is true, correct and complete. Executed this ___ day of ______ , 20_ Printed Name: -------------- (Continued on following page] 15 SOLICITATION 9509 (Transportation Fuel Affidavit -cont.) * * * STATE OF ------ COUNTYOF ------ The foregoing affidavit was subscribed and sworn to before me on this ___ day of _____ . 20_, by _________________________ ., proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me. (Notary Seal) Notary Signature 16 EXECUTION COPY ADDENDUM 1 to MASTER AGREEMENT TRANSACTION CONFIRMATION ADDENDUMl SOLICITATION 9509 May_, 2020 This Transaction Confirmation is executed pursuant to the Master Dispensing Agreement between Element Markets Renewable Energy, LLC and the City of Fresno, dated as of May_, 2020 (the "Master Agreement"). The terms of this Transaction Confirmation are binding upon execution by the Parties. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this Transaction Confirmation have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Master Agreement. Element Markets Renewable Energy, LLC Attn: Biogas Operations Phone: 281-207-7281 Email: Biogas0ps@elementmarkets.com City of Fresno Attn: Sandra Gamez, Senior Procurement Specialist Phone: 559-621-1169 Email: ------- Dispensing Fee: with respect to each month ( or quarter, in the case of LCFS Revenue) of the Delivery Period, the City Percentage of RIN Revenue, Non-Incremental LCFS Revenue and Incremental LCFS Revenue as calculated below, subject to the Special Conditions of this Transaction Confirmation: "City Percentage" means (i) with respect to RIN Revenue, eight percent (8%); (ii) with respect to Non-Incremental LCFS Revenue, one hundred percent (100%) and (iii) with respect to Incremental LCFS Revenue (A) generated by Incremental LCFS Credits attributable to RNG derived from swine or dairy manure, three percent (3%) and (B) generated by Incremental LCFS Credits attributable to RNG derived from anaerobic digestion of municipal waste water sludge, twenty-seven percent (27%). "RIN Revenue" means the revenue actually received by EMRE from the sale of RINs generated from Dispensed Bio-CNG. "Incremental LCFS Revenue" means the revenue actually received by EMRE from the sale of Incremental LCFS Credits. "Non-Incremental LCFS Revenue" means the revenue actually received by EMRE from the sale of LCFS Credits that constitute Fossil LCFS Credits (as such term is defined in the Master Agreement). Delivery Period: Begins and ends concurrently with the Term of the Master Agreement. Contract Quantity: Equivalent to the actual quantity of Gas converted to CNG at the Facilities during each month of the Delivery Period (the "Monthly Usage Quantity"). Facilities: The dispensing facilities set forth on Schedule A hereto, which Schedule may be updated from time to time by mutual agreement of the Parties. EXECUTION COPY ADDENDUM I SOLICITATION 9509 Payment of Dispensing Fee: The Dispensing Fee will be remitted to the City within five (5) Business Days of the end of any month in which RIN Revenue, Incremental LCFS Revenue or Non-Incremental LCFS Revenue is received by EMRE, as applicable. SPECIAL CONDITIONS (1) Notice of Changes or Expected Changes to Monthly Usage Quantity. The City will notify EMRE of any changes to vehicle fueling patterns or procedures at any Facility that will, or are reasonably likely to, result in a material change in the Monthly Usage Quantity. (2) Disqualified RNG. To the extent a Party takes or fails to take any action that results in a quantity of RNG dispensed as Dispensed Bio-CNG that would have otherwise been eligible to generate RINs and, once a pathway is available under the LCFS, Incremental LCFS Credits, becoming ineligible to generate such credits and no act or omission of the other Party caused, in whole or in part, such result (such Party, the "Non-Performing Party"), the RNG is deemed to be "Disqualified RNG". With respect to any Disqualified RNG: (i) To the extent the Non-Performing Party is EMRE and such action or omission is determined to be negligent, the City is entitled to receive the Dispensing Fee that would have otherwise been paid to the City had the RNG not been deemed Disqualified RNG, to the extent the Dispensing Fee has not already been paid with respect to the RNG; and (ii) To the extent the Non-Performing Party is the City: (A) The City shall return any Environmental Attributes associated with the Disqualified Biomethane to EMRE, along with any documentation reasonably requested to document the transfer of such Environmental Attributes, including, without limitation, an affidavit stating that the Environmental Attributes were not modified or transferred and that the City transfers all right, title and interest in and to the Environmental Attributes to EMRE. The City is not required to make any payment to EMRE with respect to any Environmental Attributes returned to EMRE pursuant to this paragraph. (B) If the City does not return the Environmental Attributes to EMRE pursuant to clause (A) of this section, the City shall refund any amounts paid to the City and, to the extent the action or omission on the part of the City is grossly negligent, pay EMRE the remainder of the revenue that would have been generated from the Disqualified RNG based upon the prices at which the RINs or Incremental LCFS Credits generated or that would have been generated from the Disqualified Biomethane were sold or were to be sold by EMRE, as applicable. (3) LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY IN THE AGREEMENT, THE CITY AGREES THAT THE MEASURE OF DAMAGES SET FORTH IN SECTION 2 IS THE EXCLUSIVE REMEDY OF THE PARTIES WITH RESPECT TO DISQUALIFIED RNG AND ALL OTHER REMEDIES OR DAMAGES AT LAW OR IN EQUITY ARE WAIVED. * * * [Signature page follows] EXECUTION COPY SCHEDULE A FACILITIES [To be rovided by the City] ADDENDUM I SOLICITATION 9509 EXECUTION COPY ADDENDUM 2 SOLICITATION 9509 Page 1 of 11 LCFS/RIN CREDIT PROGRAMS AND SUPPLY OF RNG (Addendum 2 to Master Agreement) and entered into effective the ___ day of May, 2020, by and between the City of Fresno, a California municipal RECITALS WHEREAS, the Master Agreement, along with Addendum 1 (the Transaction Confirmation) and this (RFP) process conducted by the City; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the Agreement is for EMRE to provide renewable fuel credit management services to the City as provided herein; and WHEREAS, the Federal Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was created under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and established the first renewable fuel volume mandate in the United States. The original RFS program (RFS1) required 7.5 billion gallons of renewable fuel to be blended into gasoline by 2012. Under the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007, the RFS program was expanded, requiring 36 billion gallons fuel to be eligible to generate credits (Renewable Identification Numbers, or RINs) which can be purchased by obligated parties (refiners, fuel importers) to meet compliance with EISA. Only biogas, that is produced through the conversion of organic matter and used as renewable fuel, can generate RINs. Specific gas that qualifies are landfill gas, agriculture digester gas and waste treatment gas; WHEREAS, the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) was established in 2009 under the AB 32 Scoping Plan. It uses a market-based cap and trade approach to lowering the greenhouse gas emissions from petroleum-based transportation fuels; and WHEREAS, capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this Addendum 2 have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Master Agreement or the Transaction Confirmation (Addendum 1); AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the covenants, conditions, and premises hereinafter contained, to be kept and performed by the respective parties, it is mutually agreed as follows: 1. Renewable Fuel Credit Management Services. EMRE shall provide the following renewable fuel credit management services (Services) in accordance with the Agreement: (a) Register (Opt In) as an Opt-In Fuel Reporting Entity with respect to the RNG provided to the City in lieu of the City opting in under Section 95483(b)(1)(A) of the LCFS as described in the Master Agreement; (b) Manage all regulatory requirements including regulatory filings; (c) Manage all regulatory requirements including regulatory filings, market rules, reporting requirements, and any compliance obligations promulgated under the LCFS or subsequent legislation; (d) Keep the City informed of LCFS market conditions on a quarterly basis and provide data confirming the price received for LCFS Credits generated from the Monthly Usage Quantity of RNG; (e) Provide annual cumulative accounting of LCFS Credits generated from the Monthly Usage Quantity of RNG; EXECUTION COPY ADDENDUM 2 SOLICITATION 9509 Page 2 of 11 (f) Provide the City LCFS and RFS2-qualified RNG during the Term at the City's filling stations; and (g) Handle all LCFS and RFS2 registration and monetization of credits 2. EMRE Payments. EMRE shall pay to City the percentage of revenue from the 3. Supply of Renewable Natural Gas (RNG). EMRE shall provide the following RNG services in accordance with the Agreement: (a) Provide RNG registered under a fuel pathway with LCFS and RFS; and (b) Provide Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) for RNG, if applicable. 4. Intentionally Omitted. 5. Term of Agreement. It is the intent of the parties that the term of this Agreement will begin May ___, 2020 and end on May __, 2023, unless terminated earlier in accordance with this Agreement. The parties shall have the option to extend the term of this Agreement for two (2) additional one (1) year terms by mutual written agreement. 6. Termination of Agreement. (a) Intentionally omitted. (b) This Agreement may be terminated immediately by either party upon seven calendar days prior written notice should the other party fail substantially to observe, fulfill, or perform any material obligation, covenant, term, or condition in accordance with the Agreement. A party will have failed substantially to observe, fulfill, or perform any obligation, covenant, term, or condition of the notice of such breach and this shall constitute a EXECUTION COPY ADDENDUM 2 SOLICITATION 9509 Page 3 of 11 material default and breach of the Agreement. The party terminating the Agreement may exercise any right, remedy (in law or equity), or privilege which may be available to it under the Agreement and the applicable laws of the State of California or any other applicable law, or proceed by appropriate court action to enforce the terms of the Agreement, or to recover damages for the breach of the Agreement. (c) Except to the extent explicitly stated otherwise in this Agreement, no remedy or election hereunder shall be deemed exclusive but shall, wherever possible, be cumulative with all other remedies at law or in equity. 7. Indemnification. EMRE shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers from any and all loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs and damages (whether in contract, tort or strict liability, including but not limited to personal injury, death at any time and property damage) incurred by CITY, EMRE or any other person, and from any and all claims, demands and actions in law or equity (including attorney's fees and litigation expenses), arising directly or indirectly from the negligent, willful or intentional acts or omissions of EMRE or any of its officers, employees, agents or volunteers; provided nothing herein shall constitute a waiver by EMRE of governmental immunities including California Government Code Section 810 et seq. This section shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. 8. Insurance. MINIMUM SCOPE OF INSURANCE Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. The most current version of Insurance Services Office (ISO) Commercial General Liability Coverage Form CG 00 01, providing liability coverage arising out of your business operations. The Commercial General Liability policy shall be written on an the use of owned and non-owned equipment), products and completed operations, and contractual liability (including, without limitation, indemnity obligations under the 2. The most current version of ISO *Commercial Auto Coverage Form CA 00 01, providing liability coverage arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of automobiles in the course of your business operations. The Automobile Policy shall be written on an occurrence form and shall provide coverage for all owned, hired, and non-owned automobiles or other licensed vehicles (Code 1- Any Auto). 3. 4. profession. MINIMUM LIMITS OF INSURANCE EXECUTION COPY ADDENDUM 2 SOLICITATION 9509 Page 4 of 11 EMRE, or any party EMRE subcontracts with, shall maintain limits of liability of not less than those set forth below. However, insurance limits available to CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insureds, shall be the greater of the minimum limits specified herein or the full limit of any insurance proceeds available to the named insured: 1. COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY: (i) $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage; (ii) $1,000,000 per occurrence for personal and advertising injury; (iii) $2,000,000 aggregate for products and completed operations; and, (iv) $2,000,000 general aggregate applying separately to the work performed under the Agreement. 2. COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. as required by the State of California with statutory limits. 4. : (i) $1,000,000 each accident for bodily injury; (ii) $1,000,000 disease each employee; and, (iii) $1,000,000 disease policy limit. 5. PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY (Errors and Omissions): (i) $1,000,000 per claim/occurrence; and, (ii) $2,000,000 policy aggregate. UMBRELLA OR EXCESS INSURANCE In the event EMRE purchases an Umbrella or Excess insurance policy(ies) to meet the coverage than the primary insurance policy(ies). In addition, such Umbrella or Excess insurance policy(ies) shall also apply on a primary and non- contributory basis for the benefit of the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. DEDUCTIBLES AND SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS EMRE shall be responsible for payment of any deductibles contained in any insurance policy(ies) required herein and EMRE shall also be responsible for payment of any self-insured retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to on the Certificate of Manager or designee, either: (i) The insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers; or (ii) designee, guaranteeing payment of losses and related EXECUTION COPY ADDENDUM 2 SOLICITATION 9509 Page 5 of 11 investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. At no time shall CITY be responsible for the payment of any deductibles or self- insured retentions. OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS/ENDORSEMENTS The General Liability and Automobile Liability insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds. EMRE shall establish additional insured status for the City and for all ongoing and completed operations by use of ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 or both CG 20 10 10 01 and CG 20 37 10 01 or by an executed manuscript insurance company endorsement providing additional insured status as broad as that contained in ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85. 2. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits and coverage shall be available to the Additional Insured. 3. primary insurance with respect to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers shall not contribute with it. EMRE shall establish primary and non-contributory status by using ISO Form CG 20 01 04 13 or by an executed manuscript insurance company endorsement that provides primary and non-contributory status as broad as that contained in ISO Form CG 20 01 04 13. The is to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provision: EMRE and its insurer shall waive any right of subrogation against CITY, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. If the Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) insurance policy is written on a claims- made form: 1. The retroactive date must be shown and must be before the effective date of the Agreement or the commencement of work by EMRE. 2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the Agreement work or termination of the Agreement, whichever occurs first, or, in the alternative, the policy shall be endorsed to provide not less than a five (5) year discovery period. 3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date prior to the effective date of the Agreement or the coverage for a minimum of five (5) years completion of the Agreement work or termination of the Agreement, whichever occurs first. EXECUTION COPY ADDENDUM 2 SOLICITATION 9509 Page 6 of 11 4. A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to CITY for review. 5. These requirements shall survive expiration or termination of the Agreement. All policies of insurance required herein shall be endorsed to provide that the coverage shall not be cancelled, non-renewed, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) calendar days written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to CITY. EMRE is also responsible for providing written notice to the CITY under the same terms and conditions. Upon issuance by the insurer, broker, or agent of a notice of cancellation, non-renewal, or reduction in coverage or in limits, EMRE shall furnish CITY with a new certificate and applicable endorsements for such policy(ies). In the event any policy is due to expire during the work to be performed for CITY, EMRE shall provide a new certificate, and applicable endorsements, evidencing renewal of such policy not less than fifteen (15) calendar days prior to the expiration date of the expiring policy. Should any of the required policies provide that the defense costs are paid within the Limits of Liability, thereby reducing the available limits by any defense costs, then the requirement for the Limits of Liability of these polices will be twice the above stated limits. The fact that insurance is obtained by EMRE shall not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of EMRE, including, without limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this Agreement. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by EMRE. Approval or purchase of any insurance contracts or policies shall in no way relieve from liability nor limit the liability of EMRE, its principals, officers, agents, employees, persons under the supervision of EMRE, vendors, suppliers, invitees, consultants, sub-suppliers, subcontractors, or anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them. SUBCONTRACTORS If EMRE subcontracts any or all of the services to be performed under this Agreement, EMRE may require such subcontractor(s) to enter into a separate Side Agreement with the City to provide required indemnification and insurance protection. Any required Side Agreement(s) and associated insurance documents for the subcontractor must be reviewed and preapproved by CITY Risk Manager or designee. If no Side Agreement is executed, EMRE will be solely responsible for ensuring that its subcontractors maintain insurance coverage at levels no less than those required by applicable law and is customary in the relevant industry. VERIFICATION OF COVERAGE EMRE shall furnish CITY with all certificate(s) and applicable endorsements effecting coverage required hereunder. All certificates and applicable endorsements are to be received and Agreement and before work commences. All non-ISO endorsements amending policy coverage shall be executed by a licensed and authorized agent or EMRE. Upon request of CITY, EMRE shall immediately furnish CITY with a complete copy of any insurance policy required under this Agreement, including all endorsements, with said copy certified by the underwriter to be a true and correct copy of the original policy. This requirement shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. EXECUTION COPY ADDENDUM 2 SOLICITATION 9509 Page 7 of 11 9. PRECEDENCE OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS: The order of precedence of documents with respect to the Agreement shall be, to the extent a conflict arises between two or more of the following documents with respect to any matter explicitly addressed therein: (1) applicable Rules and Regulations of Federal Agencies relating to the source of funds for this project; (2) any amendment or Change Order to the Contract; (3) the Master Agreement, (4) Addendum 1 to the Agreement (Transaction Confirmation); (5) this Addendum 2 (Customer Terms and Conditions) Consulting Services for Management of LCFS/RIN avoidance of doubt, this Addendum 2 shall govern with respect to any matter not explicitly addressed in the Master Agreement or Addendum 1, as applicable, each as amended or supplemented by the Parties from time to time Whenever any conflict appears in any portion of the Contract, it shall be resolved by application of the order of precedence stated in this Section 9. 10. FEDERAL IMMIGRATION REFORM AND CONTROL ACT OF 1986: As a material part of any contract for a City of Fresno project, every contractor who has employees who will work on a City of Fresno project, is required to comply with all of the provisions of the Federal Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-603, 100 Stat. 3359). This requirement includes compliance with all of the employee documentation provisions. Furthermore, EMRE will make any employee documentation required to comply with the Act immediately available to the City upon its request for each individual employee working on a City of Fresno project. 11. WORKMANSHIP GUARANTY: The workmanship of the services to be performed for the City by EMRE will be in accord with the Specifications, and where not specified, in accord with any generally accepted standards applicable to the Services. 12. ALTERATION OF TERMS: No alterations or variations of the terms of the Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by both parties. 13. CONTRACT CHANGES: No changes or modifications to the Agreement shall be made unless agreed to and signed by both parties. No prior, current or post award verbal agreement or agreements with any officer, agent, or employee of the City shall affect or modify any terms or obligations of these Specifications or any Agreement resulting from this procurement. 14. AMENDMENTS: The City of Fresno reserves the right to add, modify, or delete items from the Contract. Any changes shall be made only by means of a formal amendment signed by both the City and EMRE. 15. ASSIGNMENT: The Agreement is personal to EMRE and there shall be no assignment, transfer, sale, or subcontracting by EMRE of its rights or obligations under the Agreement without the prior written approval of the City except to the extent permitted pursuant to the Master Agreement. Any attempted assignment, transfer, sale or subcontracting by EMRE, its successors or assigns, shall be null and void unless approved in writing by the City. 16. TERMINATION BY CITY FOR NON-APPROPRIATION: Intentionally omitted (not applicable). 17. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: In the furnishing of the services provided for herein, EMRE is acting as an independent contractor. Neither EMRE, nor any of its officers, associates, agents, or employees shall be deemed an employee, joint venturer, partner or agent of the City for any purpose. However, the City shall retain the right to verify that EMRE is performing its respective obligations in accordance with the terms of the Contract. Because of EXECUTION COPY ADDENDUM 2 SOLICITATION 9509 Page 8 of 11 its status as an independent contractor, EMRE and its officers, agents and employees shall have absolutely no right to employment rights and benefits available to City employees. EMRE shall be solely liable and responsible for all payroll and tax withholding and for providing to, or on behalf of, its employees all employee benefits including, without limitation, health, welfare and retirement benefits. In addition, together with its other obligations under this Agreement, EMRE shall be solely responsible , indemnify, defend and save City harmless from all matters relating to employment and tax withholding for and ation, (i) compliance with Social Security and unemployment insurance withholding, payment of workers compensation benefits, and all other laws and regulations governing matters of employee withholding, taxes and payment; and (ii) any claim of right or interest in City employment benefits, entitlements, programs and/or funds offered employees of City whether arising by reason of any common law, de facto, leased, or co- employee rights or other theory . It is acknowledged that during the term of this Agreement, EMRE may be providing services to others unrelated to City or to this Agreement. 18. GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE: The Agreement shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of California, excluding, however, any conflict of laws rule which would apply the law of another jurisdiction. Venue for purposes of the filing of any action regarding the enforcement or interpretation of the Agreement and any rights and duties thereunder shall be Fresno County, California. 19. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW: In providing the services required under the Contract, EMRE shall at all times comply with all applicable laws of the United States, the State of California and the City of Fresno, and with all applicable regulations promulgated by Federal, State, regional, or local administrative and regulatory agencies, now in force and as they may be enacted, issued, or amended during the term of the Contract. 20. SEVERABILITY: The provisions of the Agreement are severable. The invalidity or unenforceability of any one provision in the Agreement shall not affect the other provisions. 21. INTERPRETATION: EMRE acknowledges that the Agreement in its final form is the result of the combined efforts of the parties and that, should any provision of the Agreement be found to be ambiguous in any way, such ambiguity shall not be resolved by construing the Agreement in favor or against any party, but rather by construing the terms in accordance with their generally accepted meaning. 22. ATTORNEY'S FEES: If either party is required to commence any proceeding or legal action to enforce or interpret any term, covenant or condition of the Contract, the prevailing party in such proceeding or action shall be entitled to recover from the other party its reasonable attorney's fees and legal expenses. Management of LCFS/RIN Credit Programs and Suppl addendums, will be incorporated into and made a part of this Contract. Each exhibit and attachment referenced in the Agreement is, by the reference, incorporated into and made a part of the Agreement subject to the order of precedence set forth in Section 9 of this Addendum 2. 24. MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS: Records of each of City and EMRE pertaining to the Services hereunder shall be kept on a generally recognized accounting basis and shall be available to the other Party or its authorized representatives upon request during regular business hours throughout the life of the Agreement and for a period of three years after final payment and for ten years following dispensing of the R-CNG as Vehicle Fuel. In addition, all books, documents, papers, and records of each Party pertaining to the Agreement shall be available for the purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts, and transcriptions for the same period of time as may be reasonably requested by the other Party; provided that (i) this Section 24 shall apply solely to the portion of such materials pertaining to the Agreement and is subject to confidentiality obligations that a Party may have to third parties with respect to such materials. This section shall survive expiration or termination of the Contract. EXECUTION COPY ADDENDUM 2 SOLICITATION 9509 Page 9 of 11 25. RECYCLING: In the event EMRE maintains an office or operates a facility(ies), or is required herein to maintain or operate same, within the incorporated limits of the City of Fresno, EMRE at its sole cost and expense shall: (a) After award, immediately establish and maintain a viable and ongoing recycling program, approved by the City's Solid Waste Management Division, for each office and facility. Literature describing City recycling programs is available from City's Solid Waste Management Division and by calling City of Fresno Recycling Hotline at (559) 621-1111. (b) Immediately contact the Solid Waste Management Division at (559) 621-1452 and schedule a free waste audit, and cooperate with such Division in their conduct of the audit for each office and facility. (c) Cooperate with and demonstrate to the satisfaction of City's Solid Waste Management Division the establishment of the recycling program in paragraph (i) above and the ongoing maintenance thereof. 26. NOTICES: Any notice required or intended to be given to either party under the terms of the Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be duly given if delivered personally or sent by United States registered or certified mail, with postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the party to which notice is to be given at the party's address set forth on the signature page of the Proposal in the case of EMRE and at the address in the Master Agreement for mailing of invoices in the case of City, or at such other address as the parties may from time to time designate by written notice. Notices served by United States mail in the manner above described shall be deemed sufficiently served or given at the time of the mailing thereof. 27. BINDING: Subject to Section 15 of these General Conditions, once the Agreement is signed by all parties, it shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, all parties, and each parties' respective heirs, successors, assigns, transferees, agents, servants, employees and representatives in its entirety. 28. WAIVER: The waiver by either party of a breach by the other of any provision of the Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same or a different provision of this Contract. No provisions of the Agreement may be waived unless in writing and signed by all parties to this Contract. Waiver of any one provision herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other provision herein. 29. CUMULATIVE REMEDIES: No remedy or election hereunder shall be deemed exclusive but shall, wherever possible, be cumulative with all other remedies at law or in equity. 30. NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES: The rights, interests, duties and obligations defined within the Agreement are intended for the specific parties hereto as identified in the preamble of this Contract. Notwithstanding anything stated to the contrary in this Contract, it is not intended that any rights or interests in the Agreement would benefit or flow to the interest of any third parties. 31. EXTENT OF AGREEMENT: Each party acknowledges that they have read and fully understand the contents of this Contract. The Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. The Agreement may be modified only by written instrument duly authorized and executed by both City and EMRE. 32. HEADINGS: The section headings in the Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not be construed or held in any way to explain, modify, or add to the interpretation or meaning of the provisions of this Contract. [Signatures follow on the next page.] EXECUTION COPY ADDENDUM 2 SOLICITATION 9509 Page 11 of 11 EXHIBIT A RIN AND LCFS CREDIT REVENUE SHARE PERCENTAGES TO THE CITY EMRE shall pay the City the below percentiles of the LCFS and RIN credits sales generated from Addendum 1 to the Agreement: Credit Type Initial Term of Contract Option Years Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Fossil LCFS Credits 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Incremental LCFS Credits Manure Digester Production Waste Water Digester Production 3% 27% 3% 27% 3% 27% 3% 27% 3% 27% RIN Credit 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00607 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-M REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:JENNIFER K. CLARK, Director Planning and Development Department SUBJECT Approve a Second Amendment to the Consultant Services Agreement between the City of Fresno and Quad Knopf, Inc., to prepare an Environmental Impact Report evaluating the proposed regulation and permitting of commercial cannabis activities not to exceed the amount of $300,000. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve a Second Amendment to the Consultant Services Agreement with Quad Knopf,Inc.,to complete an Environmental Impact Report evaluating the Proposed Regulation and Permitting of Commercial Cannabis Activities and authorize the execution of related documents by the Planning and Development Director or designee.The Second Amendment would extend the contract term length until December 31,2020 with no additional budget increase. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposed EIR will complete a programmatic assessment of the addition of Cannabis to the City’s Development Code to allow cannabis operations within the City.The scope of work will comply with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. BACKGROUND On December 14,2017,the Fresno City Council directed staff to initiate the process to amend the zoning code to allow medicinal cannabis operations,cultivation,manufacturing,extraction,testing, distribution,delivery,and dispensaries within the City.Subsequently,in March 2018,the Director initiated an amendment to the zoning code to allow for adult use cannabis cultivation,manufacturing, extraction,testing,and distribution -but not adult use retail sales or delivery.On December 13, 2018,the Fresno City Council adopted a cannabis regulatory ordinance which includes requirements for medicinal and adult use cannabis permits,operation requirements,location restrictions,and application requirements. The proposed EIR will complete a programmatic assessment of the addition of Cannabis to the City’s City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00607 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-M The proposed EIR will complete a programmatic assessment of the addition of Cannabis to the City’s Development Code to allow cannabis operations within the City.The scope of work will comply with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. This Second Amendment will allow for an extension of the contract term length to December 31, 2020.Currently,the Consultants have completed the draft EIR.This Amendment will accommodate the required Public Draft Review Period,response to any comments received,revision and publishing of the final EIR, through adoption by Planning Commission and City Council. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This approval is not a project for the purposes of CEQA Guidelines Section 15378. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference is not applicable because this is an amendment to an existing agreement. FISCAL IMPACT This amendment has no fiscal impact. Attachment:Second Amendment City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00596 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-N REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:MICHAEL CARBAJAL, Director Department of Public Utilities THROUGH:BROCK D. BUCHE, PE, PLS, Assistant Director - UP&E Department of Public Utilities - Utilities Planning & Engineering BY:LITO BUCU, Supervising Engineering Technician Department of Public Utilities - Utilities Planning & Engineering SUBJECT Award a Construction Contract to Zim Industries,Inc.,in the amount of $442,519 to drill and construct a new production well at Pump Station 28A,located at 505 West Olive Avenue (Bid File 3707) (Council District 3) RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that City Council award a construction contract in the amount of $442,519 to Zim Industries,Inc.,to drill and construct a new production well at Pump Station 28A (PS 28A)and authorize the Director of Public Utilities,or designee,to sign all documents on behalf of the City of Fresno (City). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Department of Public Utilities,Water Division,solicited Contractor services to perform the drilling and development of a new water production well at PS 28A.Zim Industries,Inc.was found to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder with a bid in the amount of $442,519.The proposed replacement well is essential in ensuring appropriate levels of service are maintained in the surrounding area. BACKGROUND The Water Division maintains a network consisting of more than 260 municipal water supply wells that provide just under 50%of the City’s potable water.The construction of new wells for this network is required to meet increased demands,replace wells that have reached the end of their useful life,or to assist in remediating water quality issues.The proposed well at PS 28A is necessary to offset lost City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00596 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-N production resulting from the recent destruction of a well in the vicinity. In order to construct the proposed new well,the Water Division solicited Contractor services through the bidding process.A notice inviting bids was published in the Business Journal and posted on the City of Fresno website on March 11,2020.Project plans and specifications were distributed to twenty -two prospective bidders.Five sealed bid proposals were received and unsealed in a public opening on April 7, 2020. After applying the local preference 5%adjustment to the bids,Zim Industries,Inc.,who submitted a bid price in the amount of $442,519,was determined to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.The Staff Determination of Award was posted on the City of Fresno website on May 5,2020. The price submitted is 11.5% below the Engineer’s Estimate of $500,000 ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS The project has been previously environmentally assessed.An environmental assessment was completed for the construction of PS 28A.Mitigated Negative Declaration EA No.C-97-01 was filed by the City’s Planning and Development Department with the Fresno County Clerk’s Office on March 7,1997.The construction of PS 28A,including drilling and development of the well,was included in the project description and environmentally assessed in the initial study resulting in the finding of a Mitigated Negative Declaration.Staff has performed an analysis and determined that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which Mitigated Negative Declaration EA No.C-97-01 was adopted,and that no new information,which was not known and could not have been known at the time Mitigated Negative Declaration EA No.C-C-97-01 was adopted has become available.Therefore,all necessary environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act has been completed for the well drilling at PS 28A as contemplated by the award of this contract. LOCAL PREFERENCE The Local Preference provision pursuant to the Fresno Municipal Code Section 4-108(d)was applied in the Bid Evaluation.Nor-Cal Pump &Well Drilling who is the lowest bidder did not qualify for local preference.Anthony J.Prieto Water Well Drilling who is the second low bidder claimed local preference but failed to qualify because they did not affirm that at least 50%of the total value of the contract will be performed by either the bidder or subcontractors meeting the local preference criteria. After the 5%adjustments were made to the two non-local bid prices,Zim Industries,Inc.bid price of $442,519 was determined to be the lowest responsive and responsible bid. FISCAL IMPACT The project will not have any impact to the General Fund.Funds for the construction of PS 28A are included in Water Division’s FY 2020 Capital Improvement Program budget within the Water Enterprise Fund (40101).The construction of replacement water wells was included in the water rate model used to create the five-year utility rate plan and subsequently adopted by City Council on February 26, 2015. No additional funding is required for this project. Attachments: City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00596 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-N Attachment 1 - Bid Evaluation Attachment 2 - Sample Contract Attachment 3 - EA-C-97-01 Mitigated Negative Declaration Attachment 4 - Vicinity Map City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ DPW 23.0/01-06-12 DPW NO FED DIV I.pdf 1.18 rev. 03-18 CONTRACT CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA PUBLIC WORK OF IMPROVEMENT THIS CONTRACT is made and entered into by and between CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as “City”), and [Contractor Name], [Legal Identity] (hereinafter referred to as “Contractor”) as follows: 1. Contract Documents. The “Notice Inviting Bids,” “Instructions to Bidders,” “Bid Proposal,” and the “Specifications” including “General Conditions,” “Special Conditions,” and “Technical Specifications” for the following: [Title] (Bid File No. [Bid File No.]) [Alternates (if any)] copies of which are annexed hereto, together with all the drawings, plans, and documents specifically referred to in said annexed documents, including Performance and Payment Bonds, if required, and are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Contract, and shall be known as the Contract Documents. 2. Price and Work. For the monetary consideration of [Written Dollar Amount] dollars and [Written Cents Amount] cents ($[Amount]), as set forth in the Bid Proposal, Contractor promises and agrees to perform or cause to be performed, in a good and workmanlike manner, under the direction and to the satisfaction of the City’s “Engineer,” and in strict accordance with the Specifications, all of the work as set forth in the Contract Documents. 3. Payment. City accepts Contractor’s Bid Proposal as stated and agrees to pay the consideration stated, at the times, in the amounts, and under the conditions specified in the Contract Documents. 4. Indemnification. To the furthest extent allowed by law including California Civil Code Section 2782, Contractor shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers from any and all loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs and damages (whether in contract, tort or strict liability, including, but not limited to personal injury, death at any time and property damage) incurred by City, Contractor or any other person, and from any and all claims, demands and actions in law or equity (including attorney’s fees and litigation expenses), arising or alleged to have arisen directly or indirectly out of performance of this Contract. Contractor ’s obligations under the preceding sentence shall apply regardless of whether City or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers are passively negligent, but shall not apply to any loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs or damages caused by the active or sole negligence, or willful misconduct, of City or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. If Contractor should subcontract all or any portion of the work to be performed under this Contract, Contractor shall require each subcontractor to indemnify, hold harmless and defend City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers in accordance with the terms of the preceding paragraph. This section shall survive termination or expiration of this Contract. 5. Trench Shoring Detailed Plan. Contractor acknowledges the provisions of Section 6705 of the California Labor Code and, if said provisions are applicable to this Contract, agrees to comply therewith. 6. Worker’s Compensation Certification. In compliance with the provisions of Section 1861 of the California Labor Code, Contractor hereby certifies as follows: I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for worker ’s compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of work of this Contract and will make my subcontractors aware of this provision. DPW 23.0/01-06-12 DPW NO FED DIV I.pdf 1.19 rev. 03-18 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Contract on the day and year here below written, of which the date of execution by City shall be subsequent to that of Contrac tor’s, and this Contract shall be binding and effective upon execution by both parties. [Contractor Name], [Legal Identity] By: Name: (Type or print written signature.) Title: (If corporation or LLC, Board Chair, Pres. or Vice Pres.) Dated: By: Name: (Type or print written signature.) Title: (If corporation or LLC, CFO, Treasurer, Secretary or Assistant Secretary) Dated: CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation By: [Name], [Title] Department of Public Works Dated: ATTEST: YVONNE SPENCE, CMC City Clerk By: Deputy No signature of City Attorney required. Standard Document #DPW 23.0 has been used without modification as certified by the undersigned. By: [City Certifier Name] [City Certifier Title] Department of Public Works City address: City of Fresno Attention: [Name], [Title] [Street Address] Fresno, CA [Zip] City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00602 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-O REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:MICHAEL CARBAJAL, Director Department of Public Utilities THROUGH:BRIAN SPINDOR, PE(WA), Assistant Director - Wastewater Department of Public Utilities - Wastewater Management Division BY:MATTHEW L. BULLIS, Professional Engineer Department of Public Utilities - Utilities Planning & Engineering SUBJECT Approve the First Amendment to the Professional Consultant Services Agreement with Jacobs Engineering Group,Inc.,to extend the work completion date from November 1,2019 to June 1, 2020,to provide a condition assessment of capital equipment and components at the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility and Sewer Lift Stations,for a previously approved contract amount of $245,606. (Citywide) RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that City Council approve the First Amendment to the Professional Consultant Services Agreement (Agreement),with Jacobs Engineering Group,Inc.,(Consultant)to extend the duration of the Agreement from November 1,2019 to June 1,2020,to provide a condition assessment of capital equipment and components at the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility and Sewer Lift Stations (Project);and authorize the Director of Public Utilities,or designee, to sign the Amendment on behalf of the City of Fresno (City). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On March 21,2019,the City entered into an Agreement with Consultant in the amount of $245,606 to prepare a condition assessment of capital equipment for the Project.Prior to start of the Consultants’ work a new equipment asset register was to be developed by City staff.Due to delays in development of the asset register,the Agreement needs to be extended to June 1,2020,to retain the Consultant’s services through the completion of the Project.This Amendment is for a time extension only and will not increase the cost of the contract.The current contract amount of $245,606 will remain the same with this Amendment. City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00602 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-O BACKGROUND The City entered into an Agreement with Consultant to develop a capital equipment condition assessment program for the Project.The Consultant’s original work schedule was predicated on the City performing a complete upgrade to the existing equipment asset register using in-house personnel,which would be a considerable cost savings to the Project.The Project schedule necessitated that staff complete the asset register work prior to the Consultant’s start of work activities.Staff would identify asset types,system hierarchy,equipment relationships,and catalog approximately 6,000 assets for use in the new Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS).Identifying asset process loops and interpreting the hierarchical relationships between each asset type required additional time and staff resources than originally anticipated which resulted in a corresponding delay to the consultant’s start of work schedule. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed and approved as to form this First Amendment to the Agreement.Upon approval by the City Council,the Amendment will be executed by the Director of Public Utilities, or his designee. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5),this is not a “project”for the purpose of CEQA,as this is an organizational or administrative action of the government to enforce an existing obligation,and will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference does not apply to this action because this is an amendment to an existing consultant services agreement. FISCAL IMPACT There is no impact to the General Fund.This Project is located citywide.This Project is funded by the Wastewater Division Enterprise Fund 40501 and no additional funding is required for this amendment. Attachments: Attachment 1 - First Amendment to Agreement Attachment 2 - Original Consultant Agreement City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00605 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-P REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:MICHAEL CARBAJAL, Director Department of Public Utilities THROUGH:BROCK D. BUCHE, PE, PLS, Assistant Director - UP&E Department of Public Utilities - Utilities Planning & Engineering BY:ROBERT A. DIAZ, Supervising Engineering Technician Department of Public Utilities - Utilities Planning & Engineering SUBJECT Actions pertaining to Water Main Replacement in Congo Alley between Fresno Street and Merced Street (Bid File 3696) (Council District 3): 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption per staff determination,pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities)and Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction)of the California Environmental Quality Act. 2.Award a construction contract to West Valley Construction Company,Inc.,in the amount of $309,670 RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that City Council adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Class 1 Section 15301 (Existing Facilities)and Class 2 Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction)of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guideline;award a construction contract to West Valley Construction,Inc.,in the amount of $309,670,for Water Main Replacement in Congo Alley between Fresno Street and Merced Street (Project);and authorize the Director of Public Utilities,or designee, to sign the contract on behalf of the City of Fresno (City). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Department of Public Utilities,Water Division,seeks to establish a water main replacement and water service transfer contract.The water mains and associated appurtenances in the project area have reached the end of their service life.The scope of work includes replacing 500 linear feet of water main and water service transfers in Congo Alley,between Fresno Street and Merced Street. After a competitive bidding process,the Water Division is seeking to award a construction contract to West Valley Construction,Inc.,in the amount of $309,670 as the lowest responsive and responsible City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00605 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-P West Valley Construction,Inc.,in the amount of $309,670 as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder for the Project. BACKGROUND The Department of Public Utilities,Water Division has responded to water leaks on an old 12-inch cast iron water main in Congo Alley between Fresno Street and Merced Street.As part of the Water Division’s ongoing water main renewal and replacement effort,approximately 500 linear feet of water main,originally installed in 1961,will be replaced.The Project will prevent further failures from occurring along this alignment. A Notice Inviting Bids was published on March 4,2020,and posted on the City’s Planet Bids website. The Project plans and specifications were distributed to twelve prospective bidders,and posted at twelve Building Exchanges.Six sealed bid proposals were received and publicly opened on March 31,2020.The bid proposals ranged from $309,670 to $400,400.The bids will expire 64 days after bid opening, which will be on April 27, 2020. West Valley Construction Company,Inc.,was the lowest responsive and responsible bidder,with the bid amount of $309,670.The staff determination was posted on the City’s Planet Bids website on March 4,2020.The bid price is 39%below the Engineer’s Estimate of $510,000.Staff recommends that the City Council award a construction contract to West Valley Construction Company,Inc.,in the amount of $309,670 as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Staff has reviewed the scope and nature of this project and determined that the scope of this project falls within the Class 1 and Class 2 Categorical Exemption set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301 and 15302, as this contract is for the replacement of existing utility systems involving negligible or no expansion of capacity. The project will replace the existing utility system with a new water main and services and will not result in the expansion of capacity of the existing utility system or change the purpose. Furthermore, none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15300.2 apply to this project. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference does not apply to this action because the vendor is a local business pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code Section 4-108(d). FISCAL IMPACT Award of this contract will not impact the General Fund.Funding for this contract,which will benefit Council District 3,is included in the Fiscal Year 2020 budget within the Water Enterprise Fund (40101). Attachments: Attachment 1 - Categorical Exemption Attachment 2 - Bid Evaluation & Fiscal Impact Statement City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00605 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-P Attachment 3 - Sample Contract Attachment 4 - Vicinity Map City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ CITY OF FRESNO CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. P20-00543 THE PROJECT DESCRIBED HEREIN IS DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE PREPARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 19 OF THE STATE CEQA GUIDELINES. APPLICANT: Robert A Diaz City of Fresno 2101 G Street Fresno, CA 93706 PROJECT LOCATION: Congo Alley south of Fulton Street located between Merced Street and Fresno Street. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Environmental Assessment Application No. P20-00543 was filed by Robert Diaz of The City of Fresno - Public Utilities Department and pertains to Congo Alley located between Merced Street and Fresno Street. The applicant proposes to construct approximately 500 feet of replacement water distribution mains in existing City streets. This project is exempt under Section 15301/Class 1 and Section 15302/Class 2 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. EXPLANATION: Under Section 15301/Class 1, the proposed project is exempt from CEQA requirements. Section 15301/Class 1 (Existing Facilities) consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency’s determination. Examples include existing facilities of both investor and publicly owned utilities to provide electric power, natural gas, sewerage, or other public utility services. Under Section 15302/Class 2, the proposed project is exempt from CEQA requirements. Section 15302/Class 2 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the CEQA Guidelines exempts from the provisions of CEQA, projects consisting of replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced, including replacement or reconstruction of existing utility systems and/or facilities involving negligible or no expansion of capacity. The proposed project consists of the replacement of approximately 500 feet of water distribution mains in Congo Alley between Merced and Fresno Streets. New water and fire services will be constructed from the new 12-inch water main to the adjacent structures. The proposed construction is consistent with the Fresno General Plan, will not negatively impact the characteristics of the area, and complies with all conditions described in Section 15301/Class 1 and 15302/Class 2, California CEQA Guidelines. None of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15300.2 apply to this project. Furthermore, the proposed project is not expected to have a significant effect on the environment. Accordingly, as the area is not environmentally sensitive, as noted above, a categorical exemption has been prepared for the project. Date: March 11, 2020 Prepared By: Chris Lang, Planner III City of Fresno Planning and Development (559) 621-8023 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00597 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-Q REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:ANDREW HALL, Chief of Police Police Department BY:LYDIA CARRASCO, Deputy Chief Administrative Services Division SUBJECT Actions pertaining to the Police Department’s Axon Body Worn Cameras 1.Award a sole source contract in the amount of $839,900 for the first year and $788,500 per year for the remaining four years,for the maintenance and upgrade of 556 Taser X26P conducted energy weapons (CEW’s,also known as “TASERS”),556 Flex 2 body-worn video cameras, and unlimited video storage through TASER’s Evidence.com storage service. 2.***RESOLUTION -Adopt a Resolution authorizing the establishment of a contract for the purchase and service of body-worn cameras,data storage,and conducted electrical weapons with Axon International, Inc. without advertised competitive bidding (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council authorize the Chief of Police to enter into an agreement with Axon Enterprise,Inc.to service and upgrade 556 body-worn cameras,TASERS and for unlimited video storage through Evidence.com storage service,in the amount of $3,993,900.The funding for the first year is included in the Police Department’s FY 20 budget and will be from a combination of sources as shown below. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY For nearly the past five years,all officers assigned to Patrol have deployed either the Axon Flex or Flex 2 body-worn camera and the TASER X26P or X2.In addition,many officers and detectives assigned to tactical teams have been assigned Flex 2 body-worn cameras including the Department’s Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team and the Traffic Bureau. The use of body worn cameras has made officers more conscientious of the manner in which they perform their duties and more patient and creative in resolving conflict while interacting with the public.Members of the public may be less confrontational knowing they are being video recorded.In addition,the videos captured during critical incident investigations have created a greater level of City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00597 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-Q addition,the videos captured during critical incident investigations have created a greater level of trust in the resolution of these cases by members of the public. The use of body worn cameras has assisted in the resolution of internal affairs investigations, whether they be department generated or complaints generated by the public.Internal Affairs data shows that citizen generated complaints have decreased steadily from 63 in 2014 to 41 in 2019, while department generated complaints have increased from 55 in 2014 to 94 in 2019.While there are many factors that have contributed to the total number of complaints generated,the use of body camera recordings and the interactions with the public has been extremely valuable during all internal investigations against police officers. This contract will allow the Department to continue to equip 556 officers;every member who regularly interacts with members of the public,with a body worn camera and TASER X26P,maintaining our existing TASERs in addition to upgrading older body worn cameras.The contract also includes all media storage related to the use of the devices. BACKGROUND Video technology is being utilized by law enforcement agencies at an increasing pace.The first large scale introduction of video technology for police officers was limited to “in-car”video camera systems. However,“in-car”video systems were limited to video footage captured from the front facing perspective of the vehicle. Personal body-worn cameras were eventually introduced as a more realistic tool to capture the true “point of view”of a police officer.In an era of increased public scrutiny and litigation,body-worn camera systems provide video evidence to capture critical incidents in a manner much closer to the officer’s perspective.Video gathered has proven to be invaluable during investigations of complaints against police officers. AXON has patented a body-worn video camera technology system -AXON Flex 2,and a secure, patented cloud based video storage component called “Evidence.com.”AXON Enterprise’s trademarked mounting capabilities provide unparalleled options for users to place a video camera on sunglasses,helmets,lapels and uniform epaulettes to provide a relatively unobstructed point of view. The variety of mounting options and field of view of the camera is not available from other manufacturers. The extended battery life provides approximately 12 hours of video camera operation to accommodate an officer’s entire work shift.The battery pack has LED lights to show the battery level remaining and operating mode of the unit.The video camera system has a “Bluetooth”pairing component to allow video playback on a mobile device,yet the camera has an internal security system which prevents users from altering or deleting video footage. The video camera system includes the evidence transfer system which downloads all of the video footage at the completion of a work shift into a secured,cloud based server while also fully charging the battery.The evidence server is a hosted management system which enables police departments to seamlessly manage and share digital evidence.The management system allows an agency to establish password encrypted access levels for officers,supervisors and managers.The system has a feature for the Chief of Police to designate one department member to have specialized access, which is the highest authorization level.Another access feature allows assisting agencies such asCity of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00597 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-Q which is the highest authorization level.Another access feature allows assisting agencies such as district attorneys,or federal prosecutors to have “read only”password encrypted access to digital evidence for prosecution. This contract also addresses the Department’s aging TASERs,which are in need of upgrade/replacement.The contract will cover the entire cost of the TASERs,cameras,mounting options,data storage,evidence.com docking and charging terminals,the annual licensing fees,a one -year factory warranty and additional two-year extended warranty.The warranties will fully cover the cameras and TASERs for a total of five years.While under contract,cameras will be replaced every 2.5 years, and TASERs will be replaced once every 5 years. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This is not a “project” for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378. LOCAL PREFERENCE This contract would be awarded as a sole source,meaning local preference would not apply since there is a single provider of the specified equipment. FISCAL IMPACT The first year payment in 2020 will total $839,900,and the subsequent four payments will be $788,500 from 2021 through 2024.The payments for all five years include all applicable taxes. Funding is included in the Police Department’s FY 20 budget and will be from a combination of sources as shown below. 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total SLESA- Camera 65,000 65,000 65,000 65,000 65,000 $325,000 SLESA- TASER 65,000 65,000 65,000 65,000 65,000 $325,000 General Fund 709,900 658,500 658,500 658,500 658,500 $3,343,900 Total funding $839,900 $788,500 $788,500 $788,500 $788,500 $3,993,900 Attachments: Resolution AXON Enterprise Quote Sole Source Memo City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Payment Terms: Net 30 Delivery Method: Fedex -Ground Q-246125-43955.930MH TAP Replacement (Contract #00005118) Item Description Term (Months)Quantity List Unit Price Net Unit Price Total (USD) Hardware 11528 FLEX 2 CAMERA, (ONLINE)502 449.00 0.00 0.00 80108 5 YEAR OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD FLEX 2 CAMERA 502 0.00 0.00 0.00 80117 FIVE YEAR OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD FLEX 2 CONTROLLER 502 0.00 0.00 0.00 11532 FLEX 2 CONTROLLER 502 250.00 0.00 0.00 11509 BELT CLIP, RAPIDLOCK 502 0.00 0.00 0.00 11534 USB-C to USB-A CABLE FOR AB3 OR FLEX 2 502 0.00 0.00 0.00 11545 COLLAR MOUNT, FLEX 2 502 0.00 0.00 0.00 11546 EPAULETTE MOUNT, FLEX 2 502 0.00 0.00 0.00 11537 DOCK, FLEX 2, 6-BAY + CORE 87 1,495.00 0.00 0.00 80111 5 YEAR OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD 6-BAY DOCK AB2 87 0.00 0.00 0.00 Subtotal 0.00 Estimated Shipping 0.00 Estimated Tax 0.00 Total 0.00 Issued: 05/04/2020 Quote Expiration: 05/15/2020 Account Number: 106478 Axon Enterprise, Inc. 17800 N 85th St. Scottsdale, Arizona 85255 United States Phone: (800) 978-2737 Protect Life. PRIMARY CONTACT Steve Jaquez Phone: (559) 621-2736 Email: steve.jaquez@fresno.gov BILL TO Fresno Police Dept. -CA 2323 Mariposa Street Fresno, CA 93721 US SHIP TO Steve Jaquez Fresno Police Dept. -CA 2323 Mariposa Street Fresno, CA 93721 US SALES REPRESENTATIVE Megan Hardisty Phone: 480-253-7854 Email: mhardisty@axon.com Fax: Q-246125-43955.930MH 1 Year 1 Item Description Term (Months)Quantity List Unit Price Net Unit Price Total (USD) Axon Plans & Packages 80075 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD BWC AND CEW BUNDLE: YEAR 1 PAYM 556 1,308.00 1,308.00 727,248.00 80012 BASIC EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE: YEAR 1 PAYMENT 7 180.00 180.00 1,260.00 80022 PRO EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE: YEAR 1 PAYMENT 4 468.00 468.00 1,872.00 80052 AXON AUTO TAGGING SERVICE ADD-ON: YEAR 1 PAYMENT 556 180.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 70 0.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 120 0.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 22,240 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hardware 11002 BLACK X26P CEW, HANDLE 556 0.00 0.00 0.00 11004 WARRANTY, 4 YEAR, X26P 556 0.00 0.00 0.00 11501 RIGHT-HAND HOLSTER, X26P, BLACKHAWK 556 0.00 0.00 0.00 70116 SPPM, SIGNAL CONNECTED BATTERY PACK, X2/X26P 556 0.00 0.00 0.00 11528 FLEX 2 CAMERA, (ONLINE)54 449.00 449.00 24,246.00 80108 5 YEAR OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD FLEX 2 CAMERA 54 0.00 0.00 0.00 80117 FIVE YEAR OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD FLEX 2 CONTROLLER 54 0.00 0.00 0.00 11532 FLEX 2 CONTROLLER 54 250.00 250.00 13,500.00 11509 BELT CLIP, RAPIDLOCK 54 0.00 0.00 0.00 11534 USB-C to USB-A CABLE FOR AB3 OR FLEX 2 54 0.00 0.00 0.00 11545 COLLAR MOUNT, FLEX 2 54 0.00 0.00 0.00 11546 EPAULETTE MOUNT, FLEX 2 54 0.00 0.00 0.00 11537 DOCK, FLEX 2, 6-BAY + CORE 6 1,495.00 1,495.00 8,970.00 80111 5 YEAR OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD 6-BAY DOCK AB2 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 Subtotal 777,096.00 Estimated Tax 61,723.64 Total 838,819.64 Protect Life.Q-246125-43955.930MH 2 Spares Item Description Term (Months)Quantity List Unit Price Net Unit Price Total (USD) Hardware 80108 5 YEAR OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD FLEX 2 CAMERA 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 80117 FIVE YEAR OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD FLEX 2 CONTROLLER 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 11528 FLEX 2 CAMERA, (ONLINE)18 0.00 0.00 0.00 11532 FLEX 2 CONTROLLER 18 250.00 0.00 0.00 11509 BELT CLIP, RAPIDLOCK 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 11534 USB-C to USB-A CABLE FOR AB3 OR FLEX 2 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 11545 COLLAR MOUNT, FLEX 2 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 11546 EPAULETTE MOUNT, FLEX 2 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 Subtotal 0.00 Estimated Tax 0.00 Total 0.00 Year 2 Item Description Term (Months)Quantity List Unit Price Net Unit Price Total (USD) Axon Plans & Packages 80076 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD BWC AND CEW BUNDLE: YEAR 2 PAYM 556 1,308.00 1,308.00 727,248.00 80013 BASIC EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE: YEAR 2 PAYMENT 7 180.00 180.00 1,260.00 80023 PRO EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE: YEAR 2 PAYMENT 4 468.00 468.00 1,872.00 80053 AXON AUTO TAGGING SERVICE ADD-ON: YEAR 2 PAYMENT 556 180.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 70 0.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 120 0.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 22,240 0.00 0.00 0.00 Subtotal 730,380.00 Estimated Tax 57,998.03 Total 788,378.03 Protect Life.Q-246125-43955.930MH 3 Year 3 Item Description Term (Months)Quantity List Unit Price Net Unit Price Total (USD) Axon Plans & Packages 80077 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD BWC AND CEW BUNDLE: YEAR 3 PAYM 556 1,308.00 1,308.00 727,248.00 80014 BASIC EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE: YEAR 3 PAYMENT 7 180.00 180.00 1,260.00 80024 PRO EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE: YEAR 3 PAYMENT 4 468.00 468.00 1,872.00 80054 AXON AUTO TAGGING SERVICE ADD-ON: YEAR 3 PAYMENT 556 180.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 70 0.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 120 0.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 22,240 0.00 0.00 0.00 Subtotal 730,380.00 Estimated Tax 57,998.03 Total 788,378.03 Year 4 Item Description Term (Months)Quantity List Unit Price Net Unit Price Total (USD) Axon Plans & Packages 80078 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD BWC AND CEW BUNDLE: YEAR 4 PAYM 556 1,308.00 1,308.00 727,248.00 80015 BASIC EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE: YEAR 4 PAYMENT 7 180.00 180.00 1,260.00 80025 PRO EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE: YEAR 4 PAYMENT 4 468.00 468.00 1,872.00 80055 AXON AUTO TAGGING SERVICE ADD-ON: YEAR 4 PAYMENT 556 180.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 70 0.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 120 0.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 22,240 0.00 0.00 0.00 Subtotal 730,380.00 Estimated Tax 57,998.03 Total 788,378.03 Protect Life.Q-246125-43955.930MH 4 Year 5 Item Description Term (Months)Quantity List Unit Price Net Unit Price Total (USD) Axon Plans & Packages 80079 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN STANDARD BWC AND CEW BUNDLE: YEAR 5 PAYM 556 1,308.00 1,308.00 727,248.00 80016 BASIC EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE: YEAR 5 PAYMENT 7 180.00 180.00 1,260.00 80026 PRO EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE: YEAR 5 PAYMENT 4 468.00 468.00 1,872.00 80056 AXON AUTO TAGGING SERVICE ADD-ON: YEAR 5 PAYMENT 556 180.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 70 0.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 120 0.00 0.00 0.00 85110 EVIDENCE.COM INCLUDED STORAGE 22,240 0.00 0.00 0.00 Subtotal 730,380.00 Estimated Tax 57,998.03 Total 788,378.03 Grand Total 3,992,331.76 Protect Life.Q-246125-43955.930MH 5 Summary of Payments Payment Amount (USD) TAP Replacement (Contract #00005118)0.00 Year 1 838,819.64 Spares 0.00 Year 2 788,378.03 Year 3 788,378.03 Year 4 788,378.03 Year 5 788,378.03 Grand Total 3,992,331.76 Discounts (USD) Quote Expiration: 05/15/2020 List Amount 4,684,479.00 Discounts 985,863.00 Total 3,698,616.00 *Total excludes applicable taxes Protect Life.Q-246125-43955.930MH 6 Notes 100% discounted body-worn camera and docking station hardware contained in Year 1 reflects a TAP replacement for hardware purchased under existing contract #00005118. All TAP obligations from this contract will be considered fulfilled upon execution of this quote. This refreshed h ardware will be covered under the Technology Assurance Plan (TAP) and will be eligible for 2 replacements. This will take place at the 30 and 60 month marks of this new contract. National IPA Contract No. 151089 is used for pricing and purchasing justification. Tax is subject to change at order processing with valid exemption. Axon’s Sales Terms and Conditions This Quote is limited to and conditional upon your acceptance of the provisions set forth herein and Axon’s Master Services and Purchasing Agreement (posted at www.axon.com/legal/sales-terms-and-conditions), as well as the attached Statement of Work (SOW) for Axon Fleet and/or Axon Interview Room purchase, if applicable.Any purchase order issued in response to this Quote is subject solely to the above referenced terms and conditions. By signing below, you represent that you are lawfully able to enter into contracts. If you are signing on behalf of an entity (i ncluding but not limited to the company, municipality, or government agency for whom you work), you represent to Axon that you have legal authority to bind t hat entity. If you do not have this authority, please do not sign this Quote. Signature:CustSIG Date:CustDate Name (Print):CustName Title:CustTitle PO# (Or write N/A):CustPo Please sign and email to Megan Hardisty at mhardisty@axon.com or fax to Thank you for being a valued Axon customer. For your convenience on your next order, please check out our online store buy.axon.com The trademarks referenced above are the property of their respective owners. Protect Life.Q-246125-43955.930MH 7 ***Axon Internal Use Only*** Review 1 Review 2 SFDC Contract #: Order Type: RMA #: Address Used: SO #: Comments: Protect Life.Q-246125-43955.930MH 8 Fresno Police Dept. -CA What is the contact name and phone number for this shipment? What are your receiving hours? (Monday-Friday) Is a dock available for this incoming shipment? Are there any delivery restrictions? (no box trucks, etc.) AT T E N T I O N This order may qualify for freight shipping, please fill out the following information. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00603 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-R REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:WILMA QUAN, City Manager Office of the Mayor & City Manager JANE SUMPTER, Assistant City Manager Office of the Mayor & City Manager SUBJECT Approval of the 2020 Management Agreement between the City of Fresno and ASM Global for the management of the Fresno Convention and Entertainment Center RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed 2020 Management Agreement with ASM Global (ASM)for a period of five years with a contract termination date of December 31,2025 (the Management Agreement).The Management Agreement also provides for one additional five- year extension upon approval by the City Manager. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ASM currently manages the Fresno Convention and Entertainment Center (FCEC)under the Management Agreement dated December 5,2013,entered into between the City and SMG.The 2013 Agreement was originally set to expire on June 30,2019.Through a Request for Qualifications (RFQ)process issued for management services in January 2019,the City received one response from SMG.Staff returned to Council recommending a six-month extension of the 2013 Agreement to allow adequate time to conduct negotiations with SMG on a new management agreement.The Council approved the extension,and the 2013 Agreement was amended to expire on December 31, 2019. In December 2019,Council approved a contract extension to June 30,2020,and directed staff to meet with local vendors who service the Convention Center and hear their concerns.Staff completed two meetings with the vendors and incorporated their suggested language into the Agreement.The second of these meetings included the Council subcommittee of Council Vice- President Caprioglio and Councilmember Mike Karbassi.The Agreement attached includes the new language and staff recommends approval. BACKGROUND In January 2019,contemplating the expiration of its current management agreement with SMG for City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00603 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-R In January 2019,contemplating the expiration of its current management agreement with SMG for management of the FCEC,the City engaged in a competitive process for management of the facility, with one respondent to the City’s RFQ.The City and ASM have negotiated the attached proposed 2020 Management Agreement,which takes into account input and feedback from the Council. Please note,in October 2019,during the time of the initial six-month extension,SMG and AEG Facilities merged and became ASM Global. Agreement Terms:Negotiations between the City and ASM have resulted in the following major terms: ·Initial Term and Extensions.The initial term of the agreement will be five-year term, commencing January 1,2020 and expiring December 31,2025.At the City Manager’s discretion, the City may extend the contract for one additional term of five years. ·Compensation to ASM.The proposed compensation is comprised of the Management Fee, which remains at $145,000, subject to a 2.5 percent annual increase beginning in FY 2021; ·Co-promotion. City will fund a Co-promotion Fund of $50,000 annually. ·Audit Cost Share.City will pay one-half the cost of the annual audit,up to a maximum of $15,000. ·Advertising and Naming Rights.ASM will continue to pursue agreements with the approval of the City. ·Local Preference.ASM shall refer facility users to an approved local vendor listing which shall only consist of vendors headquartered in Fresno County. ·Stakeholder Committee.A committee will be established consisting of members of the approved vendor list,which will meet quarterly to recommend improvements to Convention Center operations. ·Advisory Board.Will be reestablished and will meet on an as needed basis to review FCEC operations. A representative from the Stakeholders committee will be included as a member. ·Marketing Position.City will fund a marketing positon through the Fresno-Clovis Convention & Visitor’s Bureau and contribute a maximum of $100,000 annually. ·Parking Garage Revenue.The special event parking revenue from the FCEC parking garage will be passed through to ASM to support operations and reduce the City’s operating cost subsidy. ·Chukchansi Park Events.ASM Global will provide marketing and booking services,on a non-exclusive basis,for entertainment events for those dates available to the City at Chukchansi Stadium.City and ASM Global will share equally in any net proceeds from such events.With the new ownership of the baseball franchise,the city will be actively pursuing events. ·Removal Rights Retained by City.The City will retain the right to request the removal of the General Manager with 30 days’ notice. ·Status Updates to Council.ASM will update Council on at least an annual basis the status of operations and the facility. Cost Savings to City.In conducting its due diligence,Staff considered whether there is a financial benefit if the City were to manage the FCEC in-house.Based upon Staff’s analysis,summarized below,the City will save approximately $2.3 million in FY 2020 if it operates the facility via the proposed Management Agreement. In the five fiscal years before SMG assumed the management of FCEC,the actual annual on-going City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00603 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-R In the five fiscal years before SMG assumed the management of FCEC,the actual annual on-going revenues (including parking revenues)and on-going expenditures (excluding capital and debt service) were as shown on the following table: 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Average Revenues 2,594,012 3,534,378 3,667,333 4,322,091 3,226,702 3,468,903 Expenditures 5,689,018 6,444,270 6,464,341 6,155,392 5,593,800 6,069,364 Net Balance (3,095,006)(2,909,892)(2,797,008)(1,833,300)(2,367,099)(2,600,461) General Fund revenues (ostensibly from Room Tax)covered the deficit from operations,which averaged $2.6 million.Note that the above numbers do not include any expenses or transfers for capital,debt service or any “one-time”expenses.Based upon the prior year actuals,and factoring in a two percent growth rate for revenues and expenses,the General Fund subsidy is estimated to be approximately $3.5 million in FY 2020, should the City choose to manage the facility in-house. By contrast,under the proposed Management Agreement,total General Fund support for FCEC operations in FY 2020 is $1.2 million.This number includes the operating subsidy,management fee, co-promotion funding,FCCVB marketing position,parking revenue pass-through etc.,but does not include debt service.Under the proposed Management Agreement,the City is projected to expend approximately $2.3 million less than if it were to manage the facility with City staff. The City Attorney has approved the contract as to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This item is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented because there was only one respondent to the City’s RFQ. FISCAL IMPACT The estimated management fee impact of this Management Agreement is $762,168,with an annual management fee of $145,000 in FY 2020,increasing 2.5 percent per year over the course of the Agreement.All costs will be budgeted in the General Fund in the appropriate fiscal year and subject to Council approval. Attachments: 2020 Management Agreement City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00623 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:1-S APPOINTMENT May 21, 2020 SUBJECT Approve the reappointment of Kristi Lawrence to the Fresno Mosquito Abatement District. City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00496 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:JENNIFER K. CLARK, AICP, HDFP, Director Planning and Development Department BY:THOMAS W. GAFFERY IV, MBA, CAPP, Deputy City Manager Office of the Mayor & City Manager SUBJECT WORKSHOP - Parking Financial and Operational Analysis and Parking Authority Feasibility Study Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00591 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department BY:ANDREW J. BENELLI, PE, City Engineer/Assistant Director Public Works Department, Traffic Operations and Planning Division SUBJECT HEARING to adopt Resolutions and Ordinance to Consider the Formation of a Community Facilities District (Community Facilities District No.17 -Sewer Lift-Station Maintenance District)and Authorize the Levy of a Special Tax (Annadale Commons Development Final Tract Map No.6187;Assessor’s Parcel Number 479-270-33),near the northwest corner of Annadale and Elm;Final Tract Map No.5434,northeast corner of Temperance and McKinley Avenues) (Council Districts 3 and 4) 1.***RESOLUTION -of Formation of Community Facilities District No.17,Authorizing the Levy of a Special Tax,and Preliminarily Establishing an Appropriations Limit (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) 2.***RESOLUTION - Calling Special Mailed-Ballot Election (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) 3.***RESOLUTION -Declaring Election Results (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) 4.***BILL -(For introduction and adoption)-Levying a Special Tax for the Property Tax Year 2019-2020 and Future Tax Years Within and Relating to Community Facilities District No. 17 (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) RECOMMENDATIONS 1.Adopt Resolution of Formation to Establish Community Facilities District No.17 and Authorizing the Levy of a Special Tax therein and Preliminarily Establishing an Appropriation Limit thereon, 2.Adopt Resolution Calling Special Mailed-Ballot Election, 3.Adopt Resolution Declaring Election Results, and 4.Adopt Ordinance Levying a Special Tax for the Property Tax Year 2019-2020 and Future Tax Years Within and Relating to Community Facilities District No.17 Sewer Lift-Station Maintenance District. City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00591 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On April 23,2020,the Council of the City of Fresno (Council)adopted Council Resolution No.2020 -083 with the intention to establish a community facilities district (Community Facilities District No. 17 Sewer Lift-Station Maintenance District)(CFD No.17)at the request of the landowners of the Annadale Commons Development (Final Tract Map No.6187;Assessor’s Parcel Number 479-270- 33)and of Final Tract Map No.5434.This is the noticed public hearing to consider formation of CFD No.17 to provide funding for the Services (as hereafter defined)pertaining to the maintenance of the required sewer lift stations associated with these proposed developments. The total cost for Services is $18,000 for each sewer lift station annually.If approved,the recommended resolutions and ordinance will levy a Special Tax on the properties within the boundaries of CFD No. 17 for identified Services. (See attached Location Map.) BACKGROUND On April 23,2020,the Council adopted Council Resolution No.2020-083 establishing CFD No.17 to provide Services pertaining to the maintenance of the required sewer lift stations associated with planned developments and as defined by the City of Fresno Special Tax Financing Law, Chapter 8, Division 1, Article 3 of the Fresno Municipal Code (City Law). The landowners of the Annadale Commons Development (Final Tract Map No.6187;Assessor’s Parcel Number 479-270-33)and Final Tract Map No.5434 petitioned the City of Fresno to establish Community Facilities District No.17 Sewer Lift-Station Maintenance District (CFD No. 17)to provide the funding for the operation and reserves for maintenance (Services)pertaining their proposed developments’sewer lift stations (LS001 and LS002).Pursuant to this petition,the Council adopted Council Resolution No.2020-083,declared its intention to form CFD No.17,and set the public hearing for formal consideration. (See attached Location Map.) Council Resolution No.2020-083 also directed the preparation of an Engineer’s Report describing the Services and the costs of those Services. The Engineer’s Report is on file with the City Clerk. If adopted by the Council,the attached ordinance would levy the proposed Maximum Special Tax of $18,000 to provide Services for each sewer lift station (LS001 and LS002)for Fiscal Year 2019- 2020.The Maximum Special Tax will be adjusted upward annually by 3%plus the rise,if any,in the Construction Cost Index for the San Francisco Region. The levy of the special tax is subject to approval by the qualified electors through a special election.Two additional resolutions are attached for Council consideration pertaining to this special election. Today’s public hearing has been duly noticed and the attached ordinance and resolutions have been approved as to form by the City Attorney’s Office. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Section 15378 this action does not qualify as a “project” and is therefore exempt from CEQA requirements. City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00591 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #: LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not considered because this hearing does not include a bid or award of a construction or services contract. FISCAL IMPACT No City funds will be involved.All costs for services will be borne by the property owners within the subject tract. Attachments: Location Map Resolution of Formation-Levy Resolution Calling Election Resolution Declaring Results Ordinance City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00622 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:MIKE SANCHEZ, AICP, Assistant Director Planning and Development Department THROUGH:SOPHIA PAGOULATOS, Planning Manager Long Range Planning Division BY:DREW WILSON, Supervising Planner Long Range Planning Division SUBJECT: Hearing to consider General Plan Text Amendment Application No.P20-01529 and related Environmental Finding which proposes,in the Local Hazard Mitigation section of the Noise and Safety Element of the General Plan,to delete an outdated adoption date of the Fresno County Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex consistent with the requirements of Federal and State law, and General Plan Policy NS-6-a. 1.ADOPT Environmental Assessment No.P20-01529,a finding that the application is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)pursuant to the “common sense” exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15161(b)(3)that there is no possibility that the Plan Amendment Application will have a significant effect on the environment. 2.ADOPT RESOLUTION -Approving the General Plan Text Amendment No.P20-01529 amending the Local Hazard Mitigation section of the Noise and Safety Element of the General Plan, as described in Exhibit A. RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of General Plan Text Amendment No. P20-01529 and related environmental assessment. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Plan Amendment Application proposes,in the Local Hazard Mitigation section of the Noise and Safety Element of the General Plan,to delete an outdated adoption date of the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP)and City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex (Annex)in order to reflect that the County maintains a current Plan and Annex consistent with the requirements of Federal and State law,and General Plan Policy NS-6-a.This revision would allow periodic updating of the HMP and Annex without causing the General Plan to be outdated, and would comply with AB 2140 which qualifies the City for additional disaster mitigation funding. City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00622 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #: BACKGROUND The Fresno General Plan references to the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex include reference to an adoption date of December 1,2009.The County of Fresno,in coordination with the City of Fresno prepared a new Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2018.The update included a City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex (2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan).The 2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan was prepared consistent with the requirements of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act as amended in 2016,the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, and California Government Code Sections 8685.9 and 65302.6. The General Plan’s current references to the December 1,2009 adoption date are out of date.Plan Amendment Application No.P20-01529 was initiated by Director action pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code section 15-5803-C to amend the Fresno General Plan to remove the inaccurate date reference.Plan Amendment Application No.P20- 01529 proposes to delete any reference to the December 1,2009 adoption date in order to accurately reflect that the County maintains a current Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and a City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex.The City adopted the 2018 Mitigation Plan and City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex on December 19,2019,consistent with the requirements of Federal and State law,and General Plan Policy NS-6-a. Public Notice and Comment Notice was provided by the following methods pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code (FMC)Sections 15-5007-C and D (See Exhibit B): 1.A legal notice was published in the Fresno Bee on May 8, 2020; 2.The proposed amendments were posted on the city’s website on the City Clerk’s page. To date, no public comments have been received on the application. Citizen Committees Plan Amendment Application No.P20-01529 only proposes a minor revision to a paragraph in the narrative (and non-binding)portion of the Noise and Safety Element,does not propose development of any kind,and therefore is not an application to develop property that must be reviewed by the District Project Review Committees pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code Section 15-4906-D.Therefore,in the interest of timely action,it was not considered by the Council District Project Review Committees. Planning Commission The Planning Commission is scheduled to consider the proposed plan amendment at its regularly scheduled public hearing to be held on May 20,2020.Staff will provide the City Council with the Planning Commission’s recommendation at the council hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS The environmental assessment conducted for the proposed plan amendment resulted in the preparation of a finding that it is exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to the “common sense”exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)that there is no possibility that Plan Amendment No.P20-01529 will have a significant effect on the environment. LOCAL PREFERENCE N/A - no contracts under consideration. City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00622 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #: FISCAL IMPACT N/A Attachments: Exhibit A:Text Amendment Application No. P20-01529 Exhibit B:Public Notice Exhibit C:Environmental Assessment Exhibit D:Fresno Municipal Code Findings Exhibit E:Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Exhibit A General Plan Text Amendment Application No. P20-01529 Redline General Plan Text Amendment Application No. P20-01529 proposes to amend the first paragraph under the Local Hazard Mitigation Planning heading on page 9-37 of the Fresno General Plan Noise and Safety Element to read as follows: “The purpose of a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan is to reduce or eliminate long term risk to human life and property resulting from hazards, by identifying risks before they occur and putting together resources, information, and strategies for emergency response. Fresno County is the lead agency on the Multi- Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MHMP) for the county. On December 1, 2009, the [The] Fresno County Board of Supervisors [has] adopted the Fresno County MHMP. It includes a City of Fresno annex which lists information most relevant to Fresno in the areas of health, infrastructure, housing, government, environment, and land use.” No changes to General Plan goals, objectives or policies are proposed. CITY OF FRESNO NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Fresno City Planning Commission and City Council, in accordance with Sections 65090 and 65091 (Planning and Zoning Law) of the Government Code and in accordance with the procedures of Chapter 15, Sections 5007 and 5801-5812 of the Fresno Municipal Code, will conduct public hearings to consider a Plan Amendment Application entitled the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Cross Reference Revision to the General Plan and related environmental finding. This application was initiated by the Planning and Development Department Director. Environmental Assessment The environmental assessment recommends approval of a finding that the application is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the “common sense” exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15161(b)(3) that there is no possibility that the Plan Amendment Application will have a significant effect on the environment. Plan Amendment The Plan Amendment Application proposes, in the Local Hazard Mitigation section of the Noise and Safety Element of the General Plan (page 9-37), to delete an outdated adoption date of the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) and City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex (Annex) of December 1, 2009 in order to reflect that the County maintains a current Plan and Annex that were adopted by the City of Fresno on December 19, 2019 consistent with the requirements of Federal and State law, and General Plan Policy NS-6- a. This revision would allow periodic updating of the HMP and Annex without causing the General Plan to be outdated, and would comply with AB 2140 which qualifies the City for additional disaster mitigation funding. Public hearings on this item are scheduled with the Fresno Planning Commission and City Council as noted below. The Planning Commission’s recommendation is advisory to the City Council. The City Council’s action is final. Any interested person may participate at the public hearings and present written testimony, or speak in favor or against the project proposal. If an individual challenges the above applications in court, they may be limited to raising only those issues that were raised at the public hearings described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council consistent with their respective rules of procedure. Written correspondence to the City Council must be submitted to the City Clerk at least 24 hours prior to the Council Agenda item being heard. The Planning Commission’s recommendations pertaining to the Environmental Assessment and Plan Amendment application will be considered by the City Council. Note: This public hearing notice is being posted pursuant to the requirements of the Fresno Municipal Code Section 15-5007-D. FRESNO CITY COUNCIL Date: Thursday, May 21, 2020 Time: 10:10 a.m., or thereafter Place: See Participation Options, Below FRESNO PLANNING COMMISSION Date: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 Time: 6:00 p.m., or thereafter Place: See Participation Options, Below For additional information on the proposed project, including copies of the proposed environmental finding, contact the City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department, City Hall, 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065, Fresno, California, 93721, or contact Drew Wilson at drew.wilson@fresno.gov. Para información en español, comuníquense con Sophia Pagoulatos (al correo electrónico Sophia.pagoulatos@fresno.gov). PARTICIPATION OPTIONS: PUBLIC ADVISORY: THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND CITY HALL WILL NOT BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC While Emergency Order No. 2020-12 is in effect, City of Fresno public meetings will be conducted electronically and telephonically only. No one will be physically present in the Chambers, and the Chambers will not be open to the public. City Hall remains closed to the public. PUBLIC COMMENT: The following options are available for members of the public who want to address Planning Commission: 1. Join online webinar on Zoom. a) If you would like to speak on an agenda item, you can access the meeting remotely from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone, or Android device: Please use this URL https://zoom.us/j/93781006841 b) Those addressing Commission must state their name for the record. OR 2. Join by Phone iPhone one-tap : US: +16699009128,,93781006841# or +13462487799,,93781006841# Telephone: Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 669 900 9128 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 312 626 6799 or +1 646 558 8656 or +1 301 715 8592 Webinar ID: 937 8100 6841 b) Those addressing the Commission must state their name and address for the record. 3. Email: to Erik.Young@fresno.gov. a) Attendees may also email comments to be read during the meeting. Please include the agenda date and item number you wish to speak on in the subject line of your email. Include your name, and address for the record, at the top of the body of your email. b) Emails will be a maximum of 150 words. Participation options for the City Council meeting will be provided when the May 21, 2020 City Council agenda is posted at the following link: https://fresno.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx Exhibit D - FRESNO MUNICIPAL CODE FINDINGS Plan Amendment and Rezone Findings The Planning Commission shall not recommend and the City Council shall not approve an application unless the proposed Rezone or Plan Amendment meets the following criteria. Findings Per Fresno Municipal Code Section 15-5812 A. The change is consistent with the General Plan (GP) goals and policies, any operative plan, or adopted policy. Finding A: As outlined in the staff report, the proposed application is found to be consistent with all applicable goals, objectives and policies of the Fresno General Plan and other operative plans. The proposed amendment updates an outdated adoption date of the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex consistent with the requirements of Federal and State law, and General Plan Policy NS-6-a. This amendment does not change the overall intent of Noise and Safety Element of the General Plan. Therefore, the proposed changes are consistent with the General Plan and any other operative plan or adopted policy. B. The change is consistent with the purpose of the Development Code to promote the growth of the city in an orderly and sustainable manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare. Finding B: The proposed application is consistent with the purpose of the Development Code to promote growth of the city in an orderly and sustainable manner, and to promote and protect the public health safety, peace, comfort and general welfare. Minor changes to Fresno General Plan Noise and Safety Element are proposed to maintain consistency with the requirements of Federal and State law, and General Plan Policy NS-6-a. C. The change is necessary to achieve the balance of land uses desired by the City and to provide sites for needed housing or employment-generating uses, consistent with the General Plan, any applicable operative plan, or adopted policy; and to increase the inventory of land within a given zoning district to meet market demand; Finding C: The proposed application does not include land use or zoning changes, and its approval will support maintaining a balance of land uses desired by the City; approval of the proposed application will be consistent with the provision of housing and employment generating uses consistent with the General Plan. The proposed changes are consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan, as the required dwelling unit capacity as defined in the Regional Housing Needs Allocation is maintained. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00628 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 SUBJECT RESOLUTION - Repealing all City Emergency Orders related to COVID-19 City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 1 of 2 Date Adopted: Date Approved: Effective Date: City Attorney Approval: ______ Resolution No. ____________ RESOLUTION NO. ____________ A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING ALL CITY EMERGENCY ORDERS RELATED TO COVID-19 WHEREAS, Section 2-511(a) of the Emergency Services Ordinance of the Fresno Municipal Code says: Any proclamation of order promulgated pursuant to the authority conferred by this article shall be in force and effect from the time of promulgation and until amended or repealed by the Director, or Assistant Director, or until repealed by the Council. WHEREAS, the City Manager, in her capacity as the City Director of Emergency Services, to date has passed sixteen Emergency Orders relative to the COVID-19 pandemic; and WHEREAS, the Council hereby wishes to repeal all such Emergency Orders. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Fresno as follows: 1. All Emergency Orders related to the COVID-19 pandemic (Orders 2020- 01 through 2020-16) are hereby repealed by the Council, pursuant to the authority granted in Fresno Municipal Code Section 2-511. 2. This Resolution shall be effective immediately. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2 of 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF FRESNO ) ss. CITY OF FRESNO ) I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, at a regular meeting held on the day of 2020. AYES : NOES : ABSENT : ABSTAIN : YVONNE SPENCE, MMC CRM City Clerk By: Deputy Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: DOUGLAS T. SLOAN City Attorney By: Katie Doerr Date Chief Assistant City Attorney City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00645 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:MICHAEL LIMA, Finance Director/City Controller Finance Department SUBJECT ***Approve the 48th Amendment to Annual Appropriations Resolution No. 2019-133 to Appropriate $1,012,900 for the Purpose of Funding the Transfer of State of California COVID-19 Emergency Homeless Funding to the County of Fresno (Requires 5 Votes)(Subject to Mayor’s veto) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council approve the 48th Amendment to Annual Appropriations Resolution No. 2019-133. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Fresno (City)has received $1,012,869.44 from the State of California for COVID-19 Emergency Homeless Funding.At its April 16,2020 meeting,Council approved a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)between the City and the County of Fresno (County)so that the combined City/County COVID-19 Emergency Homeless Funding could be administered on a regional basis. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Annual Appropriations Resolution (AAR)will facilitate the transfer of funds between the City and the County that was envisioned in the MOU. BACKGROUND In response the COVID-19 pandemic and the need to minimize potential COVID-19 cases among the homeless population,Governor Newsom signed Senate Bill (SB)89 on March 17,2020.SB 89 authorized the distribution of monies to cities and counties for the purpose of obtaining emergency shelter to be used by the homeless population in those locales.The City received $1,012,869.44 on May 5, 2020. Recognizing that homelessness is a regional problem that needs a regional solution,the Administration proposed that the City partner with the County to utilize these funds.The County had received a much smaller allocation of SB 89 funds from the State than the City had received.Thus,if the two agencies partnered their monies,the impact of those dollars would be more significant than it would be were they not partnered.The terms of this partnership were memorialized in an MOU, City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00645 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #: would be were they not partnered.The terms of this partnership were memorialized in an MOU, which was approved by Council on April 16,2020.Under the MOU,the City agreed to transfer its share of SB 89 monies to the County in order to fund the MOU’s terms. The proposed amendment to the AAR will provide the appropriation authority to transfer the City’s SB 89 funds to the County. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This item is not a project of the City of Fresno and as such,the California Environmental Quality Act requirements are not applicable. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not considered because this resolution does not include a bid or award of a construction or service contract. FISCAL IMPACT The proposed action will have no net effect on the General Fund or the City’s finances.The City has received its allocation of SB 89 funds, thereby fully offsetting the proposed expenditure. Attachment:Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Date Adopted: 1 of 2 Date Approved: Effective Date: Resolution No. RESOLUTION NO. ___________ A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO ADOPTING THE 48th AMENDMENT TO THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION RESOLUTION NO. 2019-133 TO APPROPRIATE $1,012,900 FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING THE TRANSFER OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA COVID-19 EMERGENCY HOMELESS FUNDING TO THE COUNTY OF FRESNO BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO: THAT PART III of the Annual Appropriation Resolution No. 2019-133 be and is hereby amended as follows: Increase/(Decrease) TO: GENERAL CITY PURPOSE DEPARTMENT General Fund $ 1,012,900 THAT account titles and numbers requiring adjustment by this Resolution are as follows: Increase/(Decrease) General Fund Revenues: Account: 33104 Fed-Grant $ 1,012,900 Fund: 10101 Org Unit: 200130 Total Revenues $ 1,012,900 Appropriations: Account: 58002 Outside Agency Support $ 1,012,900 Fund: 10101 Org Unit: 200130 Total Appropriations $1,012,900 THAT the purpose is to appropriate $1,012,900 for the purpose of funding the transfer of State of California COVID-19 Emergency Homeless Funding to the County of Fresno. 2 of 2 CLERK’S CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA} COUNTY OF FRESNO } ss. CITY OF FRESNO } I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, California, at a regular meeting thereof, held on the Day of , 2020 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor Approval: , 2020 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2020 Mayor Veto: , 2020 Council Override Veto: , 2020 YVONNE SPENCE, MMC City Clerk BY: ____________________________ Deputy City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00487 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:3-A REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:JENNIFER CLARK, Director Planning and Development Department THROUGH:THOMAS MORGAN, Housing Manager Housing and Community Development Division KAREN JENKS, Administrative Manager Housing and Community Development Division BY:EDWARD CHINEVERE, Senior Management Analyst Housing and Community Development Division SUBJECT ***RESOLUTION -Adopting the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Including Citizen Participation Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan,and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice;authorizing submission to the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)for application of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG),HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME),Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG),and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)Programs and authorizing the City Manager to sign all implementing documents required by HUD (Subject to Mayor’s Veto) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan including the Citizen Participation Plan as the five-year strategy to implement HUD entitlement funding;adopt the 2020- 2021 Annual Action Plan as the Fiscal Year 2021 implementation plan for HUD entitlement funding; adopt the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice to meet the HUD obligation and certification to affirmatively further fair housing;and authorize the City Manager to sign all reasonably required implementing documents,instruments,and funding agreements required by HUD as approved to form by the City Attorney. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City staff implemented a comprehensive citizen engagement,analysis,and planning process beginning in November 2019 to develop the strategies and recommended project types for the 2020- City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 5 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00487 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:3-A beginning in November 2019 to develop the strategies and recommended project types for the 2020- 2024 Consolidated Plan including the Citizen Participation Plan,2020-2021 Annual Action Plan,and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice.In response to recent events,HUD has extended the deadline for submission from May 15,2020 to August 16,2020.The plans will be deemed approved 45 days after HUD receives them,unless HUD notifies the City before that date that the plans are disapproved.The City will submit the plans as early as feasible following City Council adoption to allow for timely approval at the start of Fiscal Year 2021. BACKGROUND 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan The U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)requires jurisdictions receiving federal entitlement funds through its Community Planning and Development Department to prepare a five-year Consolidated Plan detailing the housing and community development needs of its low-to moderate-income persons.Staff has undertaken,in partnership with its consultant,a robust public participation process and comprehensive needs assessment with the general public,housing agencies,social service agencies,and government agencies.Community input was analyzed alongside public databases of housing and demographic information,and current plans and studies including the City’s General Plan, the Housing Element, and the Greater Fresno Region DRIVE Plan. The analysis conducted as part of this process in consultation with stakeholders and members of the public was used to develop five-year strategies to address the highest priority needs of low-to moderate-income persons.These strategies will serve as the guide for expending CDBG,HOME, ESG,and HOPWA program funds.The 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan includes a revision to the City’s Citizen Participation Plan to better align the timing of Public Hearings to HUD requirements and to include provisions regarding citizen participation in the preparation of future Fair Housing Studies. 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan In order to qualify for and receive federal grant funding through HUD,the City is required to prepare an Annual Action Plan detailing the projects proposed for funding through CDBG,HOME,ESG,and HOPWA programs,and the benefits to low-and moderate-income persons.The 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan covers the period from July 1,2020 through June 30,2021,and is the first year of the five-year Consolidated Plan. The 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan allocates proposed funds according to HUD-defined ‘Projects’ which include descriptions of the types of activities that may be funded to benefit an estimated number of low-and moderate-income persons.Except in the case of City-administered programs,the specific subrecipients and activities to be implemented under each project are not defined by the 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan and will be presented to City Council for consideration following an application process to begin after the adoption of the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan and 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan. Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice As a requirement of receiving funds under the CDBG,HOME,ESG,and HOPWA programs,the City must periodically conduct a Fair Housing Study to certify the City’s commitment to affirmatively further fair housing.The current study required by HUD to meet this obligation is the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice.Through the community engagement process and analysis of available demographic,economic,and housing data,the Analysis of Impediments identifies existing impediments to fair housing choice and provides recommended actions,goals,and timeframes forCity of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 5 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00487 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:3-A impediments to fair housing choice and provides recommended actions,goals,and timeframes for addressing those impediments. Citizen Participation Citizens were consulted at every step of the drafting and review process for the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan,2020-2021 Annual Action Plan,and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice.Seventeen meetings were held throughout the City at different stages of the analysis. Citizens were asked to provide broad feedback on community needs at an initial round of meetings, followed by a prioritization exercise of the most-discussed needs at a second round of meetings,and assisted in the review and revision of draft strategies in a third round of meetings.Spanish and Hmong interpretation was available at all meetings,and all notices and flyers were presented in English, Spanish, and Hmong. In total: ·168 individuals participated in community meetings ·66 individuals participated in focus groups ·13 unique individuals were engaged in intercept interviews ·500 individuals completed a community needs survey ·40 housing and community development stakeholders were engaged in interviews ·818 site visits were recorded for a dedicated project website (fresnoconplanai.com) ·81,264 meeting information views were recorded on social media ·411 interactions (shares, likes, comments) were recorded on social media posts ·30,000 FresGo users received push notification invitations for community meetings ·130,000 utility bill inserts were distributed ·7,500 door hangers were distributed in neighborhoods near meeting sites ·25,000+Fresno Unified School District,Central Unified School District,and Clovis Unified School District parents received digital flyers A list of meeting,public review,and key notice dates is provided below.An exhaustive list of promotional and outreach activities is provided in Appendix A of the Draft 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan and 2020 Annual Action Plan. ·October 13,2019 -Notice of upcoming meetings and planning process published in the Fresno Bee ·October 16,2019 -Spanish Language notice of upcoming meetings and planning process published in Vida en el Valle ·November 2, 2019 - Meeting at Teague Elementary School, 4725 N. Polk Avenue ·November 2, 2019 - Meeting at Discovery Center, 1944 N. Winery Avenue ·November 2, 2019 - Meeting at Inspiration Park, 5770 W. Gettysburg Avenue ·November 4, 2019 - Meeting at Kirk Elementary School, 2000 E. Belgravia Avenue ·November 4, 2019 - Meeting at Pinedale Elementary School, 7171 North Sugar Pine Avenue ·November 4, 2019 - Meeting at Vang Pao Elementary School, 4100 E. Heaton Avenue ·November 4,2019 -Senior Focus Group at Ted C.Wills Community Center,770 N.San Pablo Avenue ·November 5, 2019 - Meeting at Highway City Neighborhood Center, 5140 N. State Street ·November 5, 2019 - Meeting at Webster Elementary School, 2600 E. Tyler Avenue City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 5 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00487 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:3-A ·November 5, 2019 - Meeting at Centennial Elementary School, 3830 E. Saginaw Way ·November 5,2019 -Teen/Pre-Teen Focus Group at Maxie L.Parks Community Center,1802 E. California Way ·November 6, 2019 - Meeting at City Hall, 2600 Fresno Street ·December 8, 2019 - Advertisement for upcoming meetings published in the Fresno Bee ·December 9, 2019 - Meeting at Leavenworth Elementary School, 4420 E. Thomas Avenue ·December 10, 2019 - Meeting at Ted C. Wills Community Center, 770 N. San Pablo Avenue ·December 12, 2019 - Meeting at Williams Elementary School, 525 W. Saginaw Way ·January 21, 2020 - Meeting at Sal Mosqueda Community Center, 4670 E. Butler Avenue ·January 22, 2020 - Meeting at Wesley United Methodist Church, 1343 E. Barstow Avenue ·January 23,2020 -Meeting at West Side Seventh Day Adventist Church,2750 S.Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard ·February 21,2020 -Public notice of 30-day comment period and upcoming Public Hearings published in the Fresno Bee ·February 26,2020 -Spanish language notice of 30-day comment period and upcoming Public Hearings published in Vida en el Valle ·February 28, 2020 - Public Comment Period Begins ·March 4,2020 -Public Notice of First Extension of Public Comment Period through April 3, 2020 ·March 24, 2020 - Public Notice of Continued Hearings (COVID-19 Related Postponement) ·March 31,2020 -Public Notice of Second Extension of Public Comment Period through May 20, 2020 ·May 13,2020 -Public Hearing with the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC), City Hall, 2600 Fresno Street, with remote participation ·May 14,2020 -Public Hearing with City Council meeting,City Hall,2600 Fresno Street,with remote participation City staff will provide a verbal update of public comments received at the May 13, 2020 HCDC Public Hearing, May 14, 2020 City Council Public Hearing, or received in writing during the final week of the comment period ended May 20, 2020. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This is not a project for purposes of CEQA pursuant to CEQA guidelines Section 15378.These plans,strategies and studies are an exempt activity under HUD NEPA Requirements (24 CFR 58.34 (1)). LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference is not applicable because of the use of federal funding. FISCAL IMPACT Adoption of the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice will qualify the City to receive an estimated $59,700,000 of new entitlement funding and entitlement program income over five years,including $11,943,000 in Fiscal Year 2020-2021 pursuant to the City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 4 of 5 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00487 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:3-A adoption of the 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan. Attachments:Resolution Summary Public Draft of 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Including Citizen Participation Plan and 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan Public Draft of Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Public Comments and Responses Redline Version of City of Fresno 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Including Citizen Participation Plan and 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan Redline Version of City of Fresno Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 5 of 5 powered by Legistar™ 2 of 4 WHEREAS, the City has reviewed census data, housing market studies, and facilitated focus groups to identify the housing and community development needs of protected classes and low and moderate-income persons; and WHEREAS, the City has met the regulatory requirements of preparing the five- year Consolidated Plan Including Citizen Participation Plan, Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice; and WHEREAS, the City has completed a required 30 day public review period ending on May 20, 2020 with no public comments received; and WHEREAS, the City desires to submit its 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Including Citizen Participation Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice to HUD incorporating citizen comments made during the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Fresno as follows: 1. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein. 2. The Council of the City of Fresno, California, adopts the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Including Citizen Participation Plan, the 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, and approves submission of the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Including Citizen Participation Plan, the 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan and the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice to HUD incorporating citizen comments made during the public hearing. 3. The City Manager is authorized to sign all certifications, applications, instruments, funding agreements, and the like necessary in pursuit hereof, subject to prior approval as to form by the City Attorney. 3 of 4 4. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 of 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF FRESNO ) ss. CITY OF FRESNO ) I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2020. AYES : NOES : ABSENT : ABSTAIN : Mayor Approval: , 2020 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2020 Mayor Veto: , 2020 Council Override Vote: , 2020 YVONNE SPENCE, MMC City Clerk BY: Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: DOUGLAS T. SLOAN City Attorney BY: TRACY N. PARVANIAN Date Senior Deputy City Attorney Attachments: 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Including Citizen Participation Plan 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice May 21, 2020 Page 1 of 1 SUMMARY OF STAFF REPORT FOR ITEM #20-00487 May 21, 2020 ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION – Adopting the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan Including Citizen Participation Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice; authorizing submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for application of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) Programs and authorizing the City Manager to sign all implementing documents required by HUD SUMMARY: • Today the council is considering adoption of the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. • Staff will provide a verbal summary of comments received during the May 13, 2020 HCDC Public Hearing or in writing over the final week of the comment period ended May 20, 2020. • These reports are required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to receive entitlement funding through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS (HOPWA) programs. • These programs are expected to provide approximately $12 million in entitlement funding for fiscal year 2021. 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan and 2020 Annual Action Plan PUBLIC DRAFT – February 2020 Revised March 4, 2020 to improve document accessibility (no content revision) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 2 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN For Program Years 2020 to 2024 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN For Program Year 2020 CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA Planning and Development Department Housing and Community Development Division PUBLIC DRAFT – February 2020 Prepared for the City of Fresno by Mosaic Community Planning, LLC Consolidated Plan FRESNO 3 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Revised 3/27/2020 to extend end of public comment period from 4/3/20 to 5/20/20 This is a draft document that has been made available for public review and comment. The Public Comment Period begins February 28 and concludes on May 20. Written comments are encouraged during this time and may be submitted to the City’s Housing and Community Development Division, 2600 Fresno Street (Room 3065); Fresno, California 93721, or via email to HCDD@fresno.gov. Please indicate “Public Comment” in the subject line of email messages. Residents are invited to comment on the draft documents at two upcoming Public Hearings: Wednesday, May 13, 2020 at 5:00 P.M. Public Hearing regarding the Draft Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments Housing and Community Development Commission Meeting Fresno City Hall; Council Chamber Fresno, CA 93721 Thursday, May 14, 2020 at approximately 10:05 A.M. Public Hearing regarding the Draft Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments City Council Meeting Fresno City Hall; 2600 Fresno Street, Council Chamber Fresno, CA 93721 If, as an attendee at a meeting, you need accommodations such as interpreters, signers, assistive listening devices, or the services of a translator, please contact (559) 621-8300 or HCDD@fresno.gov. To ensure availability, you are advised to make the request at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 4 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 6 ES-05 Executive Summary - 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b) ...................................................................... 6 THE PROCESS .......................................................................................................................................... 12 PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies 24 CFR 91.200(b) ....................................................................... 12 PR-10 Consultation - 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l) ................................................................................. 14 PR-15 Citizen Participation ......................................................................................................... 21 NEEDS ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................................. 35 NA-05 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 35 NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment - 24 CFR 91.205 (a,b,c) ................................................................. 35 NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) ........................................ 46 NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) ............................ 49 NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens – 91.205 (b)(2) .................................. 53 NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion – 91.205(b)(2)...................................................... 54 NA-35 Public Housing – 91.205(b) ......................................................................................................... 60 NA-40 Homeless Needs Assessment – 91.205(c).................................................................................. 65 NA-45 Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment - 91.205 (b,d) ......................................................... 67 NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs – 91.215 (f) ....................................................... 74 HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................ 81 MA-05 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 81 MA-10 Number of Housing Units – 91.210(a)&(b)(2) ............................................................................. 81 MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing - 91.210(a) .............................................................. 84 MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing – 91.210(a) ...................................................... 89 MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing – 91.210(b) ................................................................................... 94 MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services – 91.210(c) ............................................................................ 97 MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services – 91.210(d) ..................................................................... 99 MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing – 91.210(e) ............................................................................... 102 MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets – 91.215 (f) ..................................................... 104 MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion .................................................................................... 113 MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing occupied by Low- and Moderate-Income Households - 91.210(a)(4), 91.310(a)(2) ..................................................................................................................... 117 MA-65 Hazard Mitigation - 91.210(a)(5), 91.310(a)(3) ......................................................................... 120 STRATEGIC PLAN ................................................................................................................................... 122 SP-05 Overview .................................................................................................................................... 122 SP-10 Geographic Priorities – 91.215 (a)(1) ......................................................................................... 123 SP-25 Priority Needs - 91.215(a)(2) ..................................................................................................... 124 SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions – 91.215 (b) .............................................................................. 129 SP-35 Anticipated Resources - 91.215(a)(4), 91.220(c)(1,2) ............................................................... 130 SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure – 91.215(k) ................................................................................ 135 SP-45 Goals Summary – 91.215(a)(4) ................................................................................................. 141 SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement – 91.215(c) ........................................................ 144 SP-55 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.215(h) ................................................................................ 144 SP-60 Homelessness Strategy – 91.215(d) .......................................................................................... 145 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 5 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-65 Lead based paint Hazards – 91.215(i) ....................................................................................... 148 SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy – 91.215(j) ............................................................................................... 148 SP-80 Monitoring – 91.230 ................................................................................................................... 150 EXPECTED RESOURCES ....................................................................................................................... 152 AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.220(c)(1,2) ....................................................................................... 152 ANNUAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................... 157 AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................... 157 PROJECTS ............................................................................................................................................... 160 AP-35 Projects – 91.220(d) ........................................................................................................ 160 AP-38 Project Summary .............................................................................................................. 163 AP-50 Geographic Distribution – 91.220(f) ........................................................................................... 181 AFFORDABLE HOUSING ........................................................................................................................ 182 AP-55 Affordable Housing – 91.220(g) ................................................................................. 182 AP-60 Public Housing – 91.220(h) ........................................................................................................ 183 AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities – 91.220(i) ........................................................ 184 AP-70 HOPWA Goals - 91.220 (l)(3) .................................................................................................... 187 AP-75 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.220(j) ................................................................................. 188 AP-85 Other Actions – 91.220(k) .......................................................................................................... 188 PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................ 191 AP-90 Program Specific Requirements – 91.220(l)(1,2,4) ................................................................... 191 APPENDIX A: PUBLIC NOTICES AND CITIZEN OUTREACH .............................................................. 197 Outreach Activities in Support of the November 2019 Workshops and Community Needs Survey ..... 197 Outreach Activities in Support of the December 2019 Workshops and Community Needs Survey ..... 213 Outreach Activities in Support of the January 2020 Workshops ........................................................... 227 APPENDIX B: CITY OF FRESNO REVISED CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN .................................... 237 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 6 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES-05 Executive Summary - 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b) 1.Introduction Every five years, the City of Fresno must prepare a strategic plan (known as the Consolidated Plan) which governs the use of federal housing and community development grant funds that it receives from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). When preparing a Consolidated Plan, grantees must assess the needs and issues in their jurisdictions as a part of their preparation of these documents. The grant funds received from HUD by the City that are covered by the Consolidated Plan include: •Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program •Home Investment Partnerships Act (HOME) Program •Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Program •Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS (HOPWA) Program. The City must also submit to HUD separate Annual Action Plans for each of the five years during the Consolidated Plan period. The Annual Action Plans serve as the City’s yearly applications to HUD that are required for the City to receive the annual allocations from the four grant programs. These grants from HUD are known as Entitlement Grant Programs because communities receive the funds every year if they meet program requirements and criteria associated with each of the four grants. Under HUD’s grant program regulations, the City of Fresno may use its CDBG, HOME, and ESG grant funds only within the city limits, however, Fresno receives and administers its HOPWA funding for the entirety of Fresno County, known as its “Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area” or EMSA. With its HOPWA funds, the City is required to serve eligible persons living anywhere within the EMSA and not just within city limits. 2.Summary of the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan Needs Assessment Overview When preparing a Consolidated Plan, grantees must assess the needs in their jurisdictions as a key part of the process. To inform development of priorities and goals over the next five years, the Consolidated Plan’s Needs Assessment discusses housing, community development, and economic development needs in the city. It relies on data from the U.S. Census, the 2011-2015 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS), and a special tabulation of ACS data known as Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data that estimates the number of households with one or more housing needs. Local data regarding homelessness and assisted housing is included. Finally, public input gathered through interviews, focus groups, public meetings, and the community survey are coupled with data analysis to identify priority needs Consolidated Plan FRESNO 7 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) related to affordable housing, homelessness, assisted housing, community development, and economic development in Fresno. Comments provided by attendees at the community meetings, stakeholders and citizens who were interviewed are listed in the Citizen Participation portion of this report; an abbreviated list is below: Priority Needs Identified by Participants • Alternative housing models • Low barrier housing/shelter • Housing and programs for people who are homeless or victims of domestic violence • Home repair and rehabilitation • Affordable housing construction • Home purchase assistance • Rental assistance • Employment and job training programs • Education programs • Senior programs and services • Sidewalk improvements • Parks, recreational, and senior facility improvements • Street and curb repair • Incentives for community members who clean/maintain alleyways • Accountability and documentation of funds 3. Evaluation of past performance The City’s most recent CAPER (2018-2019) reported on the City’s performance relative to the previous Consolidated Plan’s goals. Select highlights from the 2018-2019 CAPER are provided below, by goal area. Generally, the City has made good progress toward the goals of its previous Consolidated Plan and as such, the priorities and strategies expressed in this 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan largely align with the City’s ongoing approach to program implementation. Goal 1: Safe and Affordable Housing • City of Fresno Senior Paint Program: Completed 9 with 9 additional projects to be completed in the PY 2019. • Minor Code Compliance Program: Completed 11, with 1 project pending completion at the end of the PY 2019. • CDBG Rehabilitation Program: 1 project pending completion. Targeted Area Rehabilitation Program: Completed 3. • Habitat for Humanity Senior Paint Program: Completed 13, with 20 projects pending completion. • Self Help Home Repair Program: Completed 2, with 14 projects pending completion. • Habitat for Humanity Home Repair Program: Completed 2, with 20 projects pending completion. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 8 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Goal 2: Homeless Services • Based on the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) reports provided to the City, 795 persons were provided overnight shelter, 68 units of rapid re-housing and 19 units of homeless prevention were provided during PY 2018. • HOPWA funds were used for supportive services, housing information and referral services, tenant-based rental assistance, and short-term rent, mortgage, and utility (STRMU) assistance to 53 persons. • The City also contracted with the Fresno Housing Authority to provide HOME funding for Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) to 17 at-risk families and households for the prevention of homelessness. Goal 3: Community Services • City of Fresno After School Program: The Parks, Afterschool Recreation and Community Services (PARCS) department operated the City’s after school program and summer FUN Camp, benefitting 712 youth during PY 2018. The afterschool program is offered at ten locations. • City of Fresno PARCS Senior Hot Meals: Weekday meals and programming provided for seniors at seven sites within the city. The program served congregate hot meals and shelf stable meals to 997 seniors. • Boys and Girls Club of Fresno County (B&GC): B&GC utilizes CDBG funds to provide education, job training and recreation for youth ages 6 to 18 at three City park centers located in at-risk neighborhoods experiencing high rates of poverty. During PY 2018, the program served 1,031 youth. • Stone Soup Fresno Job Development Pilot Program: A total of 90 clients were enrolled into the program, and of those, at least 49 attained new part-time or full-time employment or attained wage progression, and 26 completed training or persisted with their training at program end. Goal 4: Public Facilities and Public Improvements • Neighborhood Street Improvements: The Hidalgo neighborhood received new sidewalks, drive approaches, and curb ramps, as well as curb and gutter construction/reconstruction for greater ADA accessibility. • Park Facilities Improvements: CDBG funds providing for capital improvements to parks and recreational facilities serving low- and moderate-income residential areas. The projects include: Romain (challenger course), CA/Tupman (pocket park playground and fencing), Cary Park (lighting installation), design for renovations to various learner pools, Hinton (restroom and field lighting), Granny’s Park (youth modular center), JSK Victoria West (playground and shade structure), Dickey Playground (tot lot replacement) Fink- White (splash park) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 9 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 4. Summary of citizen participation process and consultation process An important component of the research process for this Consolidated Plan involved gathering input regarding housing and community development needs in the Fresno. The project team used a variety of approaches to achieve meaningful public engagement with residents and other stakeholders, including public meetings, focus groups, interviews, a website comment form, and a community-wide survey. Each of these approaches is briefly summarized here, with greater detail provided in the Citizen Participation section of the Plan. Public Meetings Three rounds consisting of a total of 16 public meetings were held to inform residents and other stakeholders of the City’s planning process and to and gather information for Consolidated Plan. The first round of ten meetings was held in early November to introduce the community to the planning process, provide information on ways to get involved, and collect input on housing and community development needs. These public meetings had both Spanish and Hmong interpreters present and were live-captioned to keep the meeting content accessible to participants with disabilities. The City of Fresno held three follow-up meetings in December to engage community members in the prioritization of the highest needs identified in the November meetings and community survey. These meetings utilized a small group breakout format, where each group of 2-4 attendees was facilitated by a City of Fresno staff person allowing for more detailed discussion of needs and issues. Finally, a third round of three public meetings was held in January for the purpose of collecting feedback from residents and stakeholders on a draft set of community priorities. These meetings also used a small group breakout format to collect detailed reactions and recommended revisions to the priorities. In all, 168 people attended the public meetings. Focus Groups In addition to the public meetings, two focus groups were held to collect input from youth and seniors. As with the public meetings, these groups typically began with an explanation of the Consolidated Plan. The focus group leader them facilitated a discussion of fair and affordable housing needs, neighborhood conditions, and community resources in the City of Fresno. The Senior Focus Group included 36 participants and 30 students participated in the Teen/Pre-Teen Focus Group for a total of 66 participants combined. Stakeholder Interviews During the week of November 3, 2019, individual and small group stakeholder interviews were held at locations in Fresno. For people unable to attend an in-person interview, telephone interviews were offered. Stakeholders were identified by City staff and represented a variety of viewpoints including fair housing/legal advocacy, housing, affordable housing, community development and planning, education, employment, homelessness, people with disabilities, and others. Interview invitations were made by email and/or phone to a list of stakeholders compiled by the project team with input from the City of Fresno. A total of 40 stakeholders within the Fresno community participated in an interview with the project team. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 10 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Intercept Interviews A team of City staff conducted intercept interviews at Inspiration Park on a busy Saturday afternoon. The interviewers approached families and individuals as they were picnicking and enjoying the playground with a set of short, informal questions designed to engage residents informally about areas and issues they would like to see improved within the city. In all, 13 residents participated in an intercept interview. Project Website A standalone website specifically for the City’s Consolidated Plan and Analysis of Impediments project was developed and hosted at www.FresnoConPlanAI.com to be both an information resource for the community and to facilitate input and engagement. The project website was continually updated with meeting details, contained a link to the community survey, and offered fact sheets on each of the City’s grant programs. The website received 994 visits from 818 unique users over the course of the project. Three comments were submitted for the project team’s consideration through an online comment form located on the website. Community Survey A final method for obtaining community input was a 29-question survey available to the general public, including people living or working in the City of Fresno or other stakeholders. The survey was available online and in hard copy, in English, Spanish and Hmong, from October to December 2019. Paper copies were available at the public meetings and other related events held throughout the study area. A total of 500 survey responses were received, including four that were completed in Spanish (although 28% of the English version respondents indicated that they live in multi-lingual households). 5. Summary of public comments The City of Fresno will hold a 30-day public comment period and a public hearing to receive input from residents and stakeholders on the draft Consolidated Plan prior to approval by the Fresno City Council and submission to HUD. Comments received during the public comment period will be included in this section when this plan is finalized. 6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them All public comments were accepted and taken into consideration in preparing the Consolidated Plan. 7. Summary This Consolidated Plan describes the City’s priorities for CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funding, including how those resources will be allocated geographically, how the specific projects funded by the City will address these priorities, and the outcomes that can be expected as a result. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 11 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The priorities represent the highest level needs expected to be addressed over the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan period using the City’s grant funds. In summary, the priority needs set by this Consolidated Plan are: 1. Provide assistance for the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless through safe low-barrier shelter options, housing first collaborations, and associated supportive services. 2. Improve access to affordable housing for low‐income and special needs households by partnering with interested developers to increase development of low-income and affordable housing in high opportunity areas, and by promoting the preservation and rehabilitation of existing affordable housing units. 3. Promote quality of life and neighborhood revitalization through improvements to current public infrastructure and facilities, and by closing gaps in areas with aging, lower quality, or nonexistent public infrastructure and facilities. 4. Provide services to low‐income and special needs households that develop human capital and improve quality of life. 5. Provide services to residents and housing providers to advance fair housing. 6. Plan and administer funding for community development, housing, and homelessness activities with improved transparency, increased community involvement, and full compliance with federal regulations. The City of Fresno’s Consolidated Plan preparation coincides with the development of the first year Action Plan and the annual Notice of Funding Available (NOFA) process. The City awards CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funding to non‐profits, public agencies, City departments, and developers that provide public services and housing for low-income and special needs households. It is largely through these partners that the City is able to accomplish progress toward its priority needs. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 12 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) THE PROCESS PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies 24 CFR 91.200(b) Describe agency/entity responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source. TABLE 1 – RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES Agency Role Name Department/Agency CDBG Administrator Fresno City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, Housing and Community Development Division HOPWA Administrator Fresno City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, Housing and Community Development Division HOME Administrator Fresno City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, Housing and Community Development Division ESG Administrator Fresno City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, Housing and Community Development Division Narrative The City of Fresno’s Housing and Community Development Division is the Lead Agency for the City’s United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) entitlement programs. The City of Fresno’s Housing and Community Development Division, within the Planning and Development Department, is responsible for the administration of HUD Entitlements including but not limited to the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG), the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), the Emergency Solutions Grant program (ESG), and the Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS (HOPWA) funding. By federal law, each jurisdiction is required to submit to HUD a five‐year Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plans listing priorities and strategies for the use of federal funds. The Consolidated Plan is a guide for how the City of Fresno will use its federal funds to meet the housing and community development needs of its populations. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 13 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information Tom Morgan Manager, Housing and Community Development Division 2600 Fresno Street CH3N 3064-C Fresno CA 93721 Phone: (559) 621-8064 TTY: (559) 621-8721 Email: HCDD@fresno.gov Consolidated Plan FRESNO 14 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) PR-10 Consultation - 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l) 1. Introduction The City of Fresno utilized a robust public engagement process to develop its 2020-2024 Five- Year Consolidated Plan. Prior to preparing the draft Plans, the City of Fresno hosted 16 public engagement meetings reaching a total of 168 unique individuals, two focus groups, and offered a public survey. A total of 500 people in participated in the survey. Results of these outreach efforts are summarized in the Community Participation section of the Plan. The City of Fresno will hold a 30-day public comment period and two public hearings to receive input from residents and stakeholders on the draft Consolidated Plan prior to approval by the Fresno City Council and submission to HUD. Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(I)). Through ESG funding, the City of Fresno provides support to the Multi-Agency Access Program (MAP), which serves as the FMCoC coordinated intake program for homeless individuals and families in need of services, including physical and mental health, substance abuse and housing needs. Three MAP Points are located within Fresno’s city limits, with the primary point of entry being at the Poverello House, a local non-profit that provides a clinic and shelter. The City of Fresno has also developed a database of over 500 local service providers with whom it can distribute information and coordinate activities throughout various Fresno communities. Local service providers include those providers in the fields of workforce development and community advocacy, as well as businessowners, and public agencies and concerned individuals. Throughout the community engagement period in the preparation of this plan, stakeholders were consistently engaged, updated, and encouraged to participate in the Consolidated Plan process. Stakeholders were asked to promote the outreach activities with their constituents and beneficiaries. Elected leaders, community planners, and public agencies and departments (City, County, and region‐wide) also worked to promote the Consolidated Planning process by updating their social media pages, speaking with residents, and circulating email notifications and flyers. Many of the organizations forwarded the email to their mailing lists and promoted the events to their local partners. In addition to citywide outreach, staff also conducted targeted outreach in lower income, CDBG‐ Eligible communities by distributing flyers at local neighborhood organizations and health centers. City of Fresno staff and partnered organization Helping Others Pursue Excellence (H.O.P.E.) also distributed flyers through a door-to-door effort, engaging citizens in their neighborhoods and encouraging them to attend the meetings and to help spread the word. Flyers and outreach were Consolidated Plan FRESNO 15 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) also conducted door-to-door at affordable housing developments near locations of community meetings. Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness The City of Fresno is a member of the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care (FMCoC). The FMCoC is responsible for coordinating homeless services throughout Fresno and Madera Counties, such as homelessness prevention, outreach to homeless individuals, short and mid-term emergency housing, supportive services and mental and physical healthcare access. Together, the City of Fresno and FMCoC received over $12 million in Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP) and California Emergency Solutions and Housing (CESH) funding to provide homeless services throughout the region.1 Over the period of 2019 to 2021, the city will spend approximately $1.5 million on a triage center, $650,000 on homeless outreach services for families and youth and $100,000 on a work program for homeless individuals.2 Three triage centers will open within Fresno’s city limits, and will be funded either through the City of Fresno or Fresno County. The former Hacienda Hotel in west Fresno will be converted to a 50-bed triage center operated by Mental Health Services, Inc., an FMCoC member. A second triage center, Belgravia, will open in southeast Fresno and will also be operated by an FMCoC member, Turning Point of Central California. Naomi’s House, a women’s triage center, will open in central Fresno and be operated by FMCoC member Poverello House.3 Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS As part of its PY 2019 planning process, the City of Fresno consulted the FMCoC on its ESG program allocation amounts. The City also coordinated with the FMCoC and Fresno County to establish its ESG performance standards in 2011. These standards remain in effect. The Fresno Housing Authority, as the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) Lead for the FMCoC, conducts the Point in Time count and manages data around homelessness. The Fresno Housing Authority, as well as all other members of the FMCoC, utilize the Vulnerability Index assessment tool and the Coordinated Entry System. 1 Calix, B. (2019, February 2). Fresno makes ‘good first step’ to address homeless crisis. Here’s what it includes. The Fresno Bee. Retrieved from: https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article225406375.html 2 City of Fresno, CA. (2019, January 31) City of Fresno Meeting Minutes – Final, City Council. Retrieved from; https://fresno.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=M&ID=662569&GUID=B78C13C6-1EB1-453B-B985-EFD2401C01D1 3 Calix, B. (2019, July 6). Here’s how state money is helping the homeless in Fresno. The Fresno Bee. Retrieved from: https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article232086202.html Consolidated Plan FRESNO 16 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdictions consultations with housing, social service agencies and other entities Representative agencies, groups, and organization that participated in the planning process for Fresno’s 2020-2024 Five-Year Consolidated Plan and 2020 Annual Action Plan are shown in the table on the following pages. In addition to the agencies listed, others may have participated in the online survey, which was anonymous. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 17 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) TABLE 2 – AGENCIES, GROUPS, ORGANIZATIONS WHO PARTICIPATED Agency / Group / Organization Type Section of Plan Addressed Consultation Method 1 Access Plus Capital • Banking, Finance • Market Analysis Interview 2 California Apartment Association • Housing • Housing need assessment Interview 3 Central California Legal Services • Services – legal • Non-homeless special needs Interview 4 Central Valley Regional Center • Services – developmental disabilities • Non-homeless special needs • Housing need assessment Interview 5 City of Fresno Director of Customer Relations & Analytics • Other government – city • Other government – city Interview 6 City of Fresno, Long Range Planning • Other government – city • Other government – city Interview 7 City of Fresno, Transportation Department • Other government – city • Other government – city Interview 8 Disability Advisory Commission • Services – fair housing, people with disabilities • Non-homeless special needs Interview 9 Elder Abuse Services, Inc. • Services - elderly • Non-homeless special needs Interview 10 Fair Housing Council of Central California • Services – fair housing • Non-homeless special needs Interview 11 Fresno Building Healthy Communities • Civic organization • Housing need assessment • Non-homeless special needs Interview 12 Fresno City Council • Other government – city • Housing need assessment Interview 14 Fresno Council of Governments • Other government - regional • Housing need assessment Interview 15 Fresno Housing Authority • Housing • Housing need assessment Interview Consolidated Plan FRESNO 18 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Agency / Group / Organization Type Section of Plan Addressed Consultation Method 16 Fresno Metro Ministry • Services – food, health • Non-homeless special needs Interview 17 Fresno Planning Commission • Other government - city • Housing need assessment Interview 18 Fresno Police Department • Other government - city • Non-homeless special needs Interview 19 Fresno Public Works • Other government - city • Non-homeless special needs • Non-housing community development strategy Interview 20 Highway City Community Development, Inc. • Civic Organization • Housing need assessment Interview 21 Lowell Community Development Corporation • Civic Organization • Housing need assessment Interview 22 Marjaree Mason Center • Services – domestic violence • Housing need assessment Interview 23 Orange Center School District • Services – education • Housing need assessment Interview 24 RH Community Builders • Housing • Housing need assessment Interview 25 Sanger Unified School District • Services – education • Housing need assessment Interview 26 Transform Fresno • Other government - city • Housing need assessment Interview 27 Turning Point of Central California • Housing • Services – homelessness • Housing need assessment • Homeless needs • Homelessness strategy Interview 28 WestCare California, Inc. • Services – health, mental health • Non-homeless special needs Interview Consolidated Plan FRESNO 19 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting Efforts were made to consult as broad a group of community stakeholders as possible. Email notifications and invitations regarding the community meetings and survey were distributed to stakeholders by the City of Fresno. No agency types were excluded from participation. Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan TABLE 3 – OTHER LOCAL / REGIONAL / FEDERAL PLANNING EFFORTS Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan? Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan City of Fresno The Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan covers long range planning topics such as urban form, transportation, natural resources, historical/cultural resources and health and wellness. Specific housing related goals including increasing quality of housing and homeownership, and increased access to health and mental health services are also reflected in the strategic plan. Drive Plan City of Fresno The DRIVE Plan has goals to improve housing affordability and stability, reduce racial and economic isolation and support environmental justice and sustainability, most of which are addressed in the strategic plan. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 20 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan? Fresno Parks Master Plan City of Fresno The Fresno Parks Master Plan includes goals to maintain, improve and expand its existing parks, to include associated recreational facilities; strategic plan. 2015 - 2023 Housing Element City of Fresno The goals of the 2015-2023 Housing Element are for the City of Fresno to meet its RHNA housing requirements, assist in the development of housing for low- income households, remove government constraints on housing development, conserve existing affordable housing and to promote equal housing opportunity, which are shared goals with this strategic plan. Street to Home Fresno County Fresno Housing Authority Street to Home Fresno County identifies solutions to help reduce and ultimately end unsheltered homelessness. Several recommendations focused on affordable housing and resources for survivors of domestic violence align with the goals and priorities identified in the strategic plan. Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness, 2006- 2016 Fresno Madera Continuum of Care The FMCoC Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness aims to end homelessness through the collaboration of its Continuum of Care members. Strategies to expand health, mental health, job training and other services, as well as housing, align with the goals and priorities identified in the strategic plan. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 21 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe cooperation and coordination with other public entities, including the State and any adjacent units of general local government, in the implementation of the Consolidated Plan (91.215(l)) The City of Fresno coordinates with the FMCoC and other Continuum of Care member agencies, such as the Fresno Housing Authority, to expand both housing and services for the region’s homeless population. PR-15 Citizen Participation 1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation Summarize citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting The City of Fresno follows the process for public participation that is outlined in the City’s Citizen Participation Plan, which complies with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) citizen participation requirements listed in federal regulation 24 CFR 91.105. The Citizen Participation Plan is designed to ensure resident involvement in the 2020-2024 Five-Year Consolidated Plan and 2020 Annual Action Plan for community development programs including CDBG, HOME, ESG and HOPWA programs. To obtain input from residents, the City of Fresno began by gathering initial input about priority community development, housing, and homeless needs through ten community meetings, two focus groups, stakeholder and intercept interviews, and a community-wide survey open to residents and other stakeholders. In two subsequent community engagement efforts the City held six meetings to gather feedback on initial engagement results and on draft Consolidated Plan priorities. Dates, time, and locations for the meetings are shown below and results are summarized in the table that follows. Community Meeting #1 Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 10:30 AM Teague Elementary School, 4725 N. Polk Avenue, Fresno, CA 93722 Community Meeting #2 Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 1:00 PM Discovery Center, 1944 N. Winery Avenue, Fresno, CA 93703 Community Meeting #3 Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 3:00 PM Inspiration Park, 5770 W. Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 93722 Community Meeting #4 Monday, November 4, 2019 at 6:00 PM Kirk Elementary School, 2000 E. Belgravia Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 22 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Community Meeting #5 Monday, November 4, 2019 at 6:30 PM Pinedale Elementary School, 7171 North Sugar Pine Avenue, Fresno, CA 93650 Community Meeting #6 Monday, November 4, 2019 at 6:30 PM 4100 E. Heaton Avenue, Fresno, CA 93702 Community Meeting #7 Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 4:00 PM Highway City, 5140 N. State Street, Fresno, CA 93722 Community Meeting #8 Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 6:00 PM Webster Elementary School, 2600 E. Tyler Avenue, Fresno, CA 93701 Community Meeting #9 Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 6:30 PM Centennial Elementary School, 3830 E. Saginaw Way, Fresno, CA 93726 Community Meeting #10 Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 5:00 PM City of Fresno City Hall, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721 Senior Focus Group Monday, November 4, 2019 at 11:30 AM Ted C. Willis Community Center, 770 N. San Pablo Avenue, Fresno, CA 93728 Teen/Pre-Teen Focus Group Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 5:30 PM Maxie L. Parks Community Center, 1802 E. California Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706 Public Input Feedback Meeting #1 Monday, December 9, 2019 at 6:00 PM Leavenworth Elementary School, 4420 E. Thomas Avenue, Fresno, CA 93702 Public Input Feedback Meeting #2 Tuesday, December 10, 2019 at 5:30 PM Ted C. Willis Community Center, 770 N. San Pablo Avenue, Fresno, CA 93728 Public Input Feedback Meeting #3 Thursday, December 12, 2019 at 6:00 PM Williams Elementary School, 525 W. Saginaw Way, Fresno, CA 93705 Draft Priorities Feedback Meeting #1 Tuesday, January 21, 2020 at 6:00 PM Sal Mosqueda Community Center, 4670 E. Butler Avenue, Fresno, CA 93702 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 23 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Draft Priorities Feedback Meeting #2 Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 6:00 PM Wesley United Methodist Church, 1343 E. Barstow Avenue, Fresno, CA 93710 Draft Priorities Feedback Meeting #3 Thursday, January 23, 2020 at 6:00 PM West Side Seventh Day Adventist Church, 2750 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Fresno, CA 93706 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 24 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) LOCATIONS OF CONSOLIDATED PLAN COMMUNITY OUTREACH EVENTS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 25 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Promotional Activities Diverse tactics were utilized to encourage community participation in the community meetings, including: • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Social media posts on Facebook, Twitter, and Nextdoor. • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers, and select schools located near sites of community meetings. • Digital distribution of flyers at Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools. • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue. • Public notice in the Fresno Bee and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle for meetings held in November. • Utility bill inserts distributed to all customers in the City of Fresno for the meetings held in November. • Door-to-door canvasing, hanging flyers on doors and engaging with neighborhood residents near the locations of the December and January meetings. • Flyers distributed to apartment complexes location near the sites of December and January meetings. • Flyers distributed at the Christmas Parade for the December meetings, and the Southeast Asian Family Education Conference for the January meetings. • Advertisement in the Fresno Bee for the meetings held in December. • Push notification on the City’s resident service app, FresGo, for the December meetings. • Participation and flyer distribution at community meetings including the El Dorado Neighborhood meeting and the Winchell Elementary School resident meeting promoting the January meetings. • Printed flyers distributed at food distributions and congregations near the site of community meetings, as well as announcements during services for the January meetings. • The El Dorado Park CDC created custom flyers and invited residents attending a local event, and by inviting residents to dinner before the meeting to encourage attendance. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 26 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Citizen Participation Outreach TABLE 4 – CITIZEN PARTICIPATION OUTREACH Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received 1 Community Meetings • Residents, including minority residents, people with limited English proficiency, people with disabilities, and public/ assisted housing residents • Housing and service providers • Community development practitioners 59 attendees Greatest Needs • Improved mix of housing types • Housing rehabilitation citywide, especially for seniors and Southwest Fresno homeowners • Rehabilitation/accessibility improvements to mobile homes • First-time homeowner programs • Funding to help low-income homeowners construct/convert ADUs • Housing for the elderly and people with disabilities • Housing for young people who are struggling with debt • Infrastructure support for housing density, affordable housing • Infill housing in Southwest Fresno • Homelessness prevention and rapid rehousing • Street outreach to people who are homeless • Low-barrier shelters as a short-term link to transitional housing • Dorm-style housing, tiny homes for people who are homeless • Rental readiness and landlord damage insurance program • Safe places/services for homeless people living in cars or tents • Proactive code enforcement in Southwest Fresno and emergency housing if needed while homes are repaired • Community maintenance in South Fresno – pothole repair, tree trimming, lawn mowing • Safe routes to school, sidewalks, crosswalks, street lighting, school zone and school crossing signage, speed bumps • Information and application assistance for people living with HIV and AIDS to access medication • Youth job programs/job training • Facility and internet improvements at Boys and Girls Clubs • Facility improvements at parks and community centers, including Maxie Parks and Frank H Ball Consolidated Plan FRESNO 27 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received • Reduced cost or free transit for people who are homeless or on fixed incomes • Improved safety and police response times in Tower District • Drainage improvements in Tower District • Improved community outreach to Southwest Fresno residents for participation in community planning • Economic development, particularly grocery store/healthy foods 2 Intercept Interviews at Inspiration Park • Residents 13 interviewees Greatest Needs • Parks need to be cleaned up • Anti-racism programming • More parks for kids • Transitional housing programs • Afterschool programs • Services for the homeless • Security at parks • Downtown revitalization projects • Food, meals for the homeless • Street cleanups • Street lighting • Pothole repairs • Pedestrian signaling to improve safety of crosswalks • Information resources for people experiencing domestic violence • More domestic violence shelters • Soccer fields • Improved play equipment at city parks • Bathroom renovations at city parks • Basketball courts • Recreation space for youth with pool tables, table tennis 3 Seniors Focus Group • Senior residents 36 attendees Greatest Needs • Better sidewalks • More parks • Tree trimming program Consolidated Plan FRESNO 28 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received • Funds to repair yard fences, decks • Neighborhood cleanups • Street lighting • Extended hours for existing senior programs • Restore cuts to senior programs to improve the quantity of offerings • Helpline for reporting elder abuse • Homebuyer assistance • Assistance with home repair and improvement • Utility assistance • Handicapped ramps 4 Teen/Pre-Teen Focus Group • Teens, pre-teens, including minorities 30 attendees Greatest Needs • Gym equipment • More field trips and activities • Computer lab • Teen room with TVs • Landscaping improvements grass can be played in • Restroom improvements • Another community center • Pothole repair • Shopping centers/ grocery stores 5 Stakeholder Interviews • Housing and service providers • Community development practitioners 40 interviewees Greatest Community Development Needs • Greater public and private investment in Southwest Fresno; demographic and income statistics from SW Fresno are often used to justify grants but the neighborhood doesn’t see the impact • Careful redevelopment in Southwest Fresno so homeowners are not displaced by rising property values • Improvements along main corridors in Tower District and South Fresno • Parks – maintenance, improvements, addition of new parks • Safety, streetlighting, and environmental improvements in West Fresno Consolidated Plan FRESNO 29 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received • Job training and job counseling services with supportive services; better coordination of existing workforce development resources; focus on living wage jobs with benefits • Youth activities/programming • Senior activities/programming • Senior centers in South and Northwest Fresno • Mental health facilities • Business development, especially grocery stores • Improved transit service for special needs groups (people with disabilities, people who are homeless, recent immigrants, people living with HIV/AIDS especially in rural areas) • The neighborhood revitalization team should be reconstituted • Infill development and improvement of vacant buildings/lots • CDBG should be used in ways that genuinely improve the lives of low-income people, not for streets and infrastructure that the City should be providing anyway • Increase secondary impact of grants/public spending with more robust disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) requirements • City should focus on educating and engaging the public, including youth, in planning processes Greatest Housing and Homelessness Needs • Affordable units with contracts that ensure long-term affordability • Significant affordability covenants should be attached to any project that receives public funding – not just CDBG or HOME, but general funds and all others too • A community land trust model would permanently secure affordable housing within the city’s inventory • Mixed income housing, including housing affordable to low, moderate, and middle income households • Greater mix of housing types – condos, townhomes, apartments • Preservation of existing affordable housing through rental rehab • Single-family rehab and roof repair Consolidated Plan FRESNO 30 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received • Balancing neighborhood investment and gentrification • Code enforcement, particularly in Southwest Fresno • Senior housing • Housing for people with development disabilities • Any housing development should be in the core of the city – the downtown needs to be revived, attractive • Fresno is 35,000 units short of its affordable housing goal; City should step up and take more responsibility for ensuring housing affordability • Case management and supportive services for people who are homeless • Bridge housing, rapid rehousing, and homelessness prevention • Housing and supportive services for youth aging out of foster care • Homelessness needs have spread from downtown to all parts of Fresno – services are needed everywhere • Safety concerns in homeless camps • Seek ways to leverage / maximize the federal funding the City has available • City should identify clear housing priorities and take an active role in reaching out to/recruiting affordable housing developers and partnering with Housing Authority 6 Community Needs Prioritization Meetings • Residents, including minority residents, people with limited English proficiency, people with disabilities, and public/ assisted housing residents • Housing and service providers • Community development practitioners 36 attendees Priority Needs Identified by Participants • Home repair and rehabilitation • Affordable housing construction • Home purchase assistance • Rental assistance • Alternative housing models • Low barrier housing • Housing and programs for people who are homeless or victims of domestic violence • Employment and job training programs • Education programs Consolidated Plan FRESNO 31 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received • Senior programs and services • Sidewalk improvements • Parks, recreational, and senior facility improvements • Street and curb repair • Incentives for community members who clean/maintain alleyways • Accountability and documentation of funds 7 Draft Priority Feedback Meetings • Residents, including minority residents, people with limited English proficiency, people with disabilities, and public/ assisted housing residents • Housing and service providers • Community development practitioners 73 attendees Feedback on Draft Priority A: Provide assistance for the homeless and those at risk of homelessness through low- barrier shelter options and housing first collaborations. • Define “homeless,” “low-barrier shelter,” and “housing first” • Differing views on funding low-barrier shelters, some support less restrictions, others concerned with “abuse of the system” • Support for people without substance abuse, domestic violence, or other specific needs should also be available • Prevent returns to homelessness • Avoid family separation • Center where homeless people can access resources • Pay attention to trauma and criminalization of trauma • Excellent priority; reword to emphasize how big the need is • This is not a priority Feedback on Draft Priority B: Increase development and rehabilitation of affordable housing for low-income and special needs households, particularly in high opportunity areas. • Define “affordable housing” and “high opportunity area” • Focus on long-term solutions to affordable housing need • Support for affordable housing in high opportunity areas, including access to greenspace, grocery stores, low crime, transportation • Include energy efficiency and ADA compliance • Fix up empty houses • Focus on equity and density • Highest priority Consolidated Plan FRESNO 32 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received Feedback on Draft Priority C: Provide public infrastructure and facility improvements to strengthen neighborhood revitalization. • Focus on historically underfunded neighborhoods • Needs to be done equitably • Fix hazardous areas (sidewalks, lighting) • Alleys and potholes • Pools and splash pads • Community centers • Deteriorated property perpetuates crime (broken window theory) Feedback on Draft Priority D: Provide assistance to low-income and special needs households. • Too vague, needs to be more specific; list example activities • Differentiate between Priority B • Provide wraparound services (community services in addition to those needed for addressing homelessness) • Provide ramps, walking paths, greenspace • Could include programs for youth/schools • Prevent returns to homelessness • Very long wait for housing support Feedback on Draft Priority E: Provide fair housing education services to help residents and housing providers understand their rights and responsibilities. • Include legal services • Readily available information on resources • Resource education meetings to non-profits/social services • Train people in neighborhoods to serve on outreach teams • Focus on housing with public funding; stop funding of issues • Frequent checks by FHA • Go beyond fair housing education – equitable housing and anti- displacement Consolidated Plan FRESNO 33 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received Feedback on Draft Priority F: Plan and administer funding for community development, housing, and homelessness activities in compliance with federal regulations. • Ensure collaboration with community groups/allies • Think differently rather than continuing to do the same things • Replace with a community-driven priority • Overarching mandate/mission statement for the program Other Comments • $11 million is not enough to address all of Fresno’s needs • Strengthen collaboration between City and non-profits/private sector, particularly related to homelessness • Plan is focused on housing and homelessness more than public services and community development • Follow-through and implementation is very important • Priorities should be scrapped and money for Southwest Fresno should be given to Southwest Fresno 8 Website Contact Form • Residents, including minority residents, people with limited English proficiency, people with disabilities, and public/ assisted housing residents • Housing and service providers • Community development practitioners 3 comment submissions received General Comments • Use the City’s grant funds for projects that can be completed quickly, that reduce the consequences of possible failure, and that avoid further unfunded liabilities for the City • Find an unused parking lot or other space for construction of a "mini-village" of tiny houses and pop-up shops • Use empty lots to build tiny houses for the homeless • Help organizations already helping such as the Poverello House and Fresno Rescue Mission • Re-purpose empty buildings for low-cost housing • Litter and waste left behind by people who are homeless is a public health concern • Law enforcement should relocate people who are homeless in the interest of preserving the viability of local businesses 9 Community Needs Survey • Residents, including minority residents, people with limited English 500 participants Highest Ranked Community Development Needs • Street, road, or sidewalk improvements • Homeless and domestic violence shelters Consolidated Plan FRESNO 34 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received proficiency, people with disabilities, and public/ assisted housing residents • Housing and service providers • Community development practitioners • Neighborhood cleanups • Drug abuse education/crime prevention • Child abuse prevention • Incentives for creating jobs • Community parks, gyms, and recreational fields • Redevelopment or demolition of abandoned properties • After schools services • Employment training • Domestic abuse services • Domestic violence and elder abuse prevention • Outreach to domestic violence and elder abuse victims • Youth centers Highest Ranked Housing and Homeless Needs • Homelessness prevention • Transitional/supportive housing programs • Access to homeless shelters • Outreach to homeless persons • Permanent housing • Construction of new affordable rental units • Energy efficiency improvements to housing • Access to domestic violence and elder abuse shelters Consolidated Plan FRESNO 35 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) NEEDS ASSESSMENT NA-05 Overview Needs Assessment Overview To inform the development of priorities and goals over the next five years, this section of the Consolidated Plan discusses housing, community development, and economic development needs in the City of Fresno. It relies on data from the U.S. Census, the 2011-2015 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS), and a special tabulation of ACS data known as Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data that estimates the number of households with one or more housing needs. Local data regarding homelessness and assisted housing is included. Finally, public input gathered through interviews, focus groups, meetings, and the community survey are coupled with data analysis to identify priority needs related to affordable housing, homelessness, assisted housing, community development, and economic development in Fresno. NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment - 24 CFR 91.205 (a,b,c) Summary of Housing Needs According to the 2011-2015 5-Year American Community Survey, Fresno has a population of 510,450 residents living in 161,915 households. The city’s population increased 3% between 2009 and 2015. Estimates from the 2011-2015 ACS data place the median household income in Fresno at $41,531. This figure represents a 3% decrease from the city’s median household income from 2009, which was $43,036. Fresno’s median income is lower than that of Fresno County, where 5-Year 2011-2015 ACS estimates place the county’s median income at $45,233, down from $46,230 in 2009. Table 6 segments households by income and household type, including small families (2-4 members), large families (5 or more members), households with seniors, and households with young children. There are 78,845 households who are low- or moderate-income, with incomes at or below 80% of the HUD Adjusted Median Family Income (HAMFI). These households constitute nearly half (49%) of all Fresno households. The largest shares of low- and moderate-income households are small families (40%) and families with small children (30%). Large family households make up 18% of these households, while households with older residents are less likely to be low or moderate-income (15% are elderly households and 11% are frail elderly households). Within the designated household types shown in Table 6, households with small children have low or moderate incomes at the highest rate of all family types (64%). For many low- and moderate-income households in Fresno, finding and maintaining suitable housing at an affordable cost is a challenge. Tables 6 through 11 identify housing needs by tenure based on Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data. CHAS data is a special tabulation of the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) that is largely not Consolidated Plan FRESNO 36 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) available through standard Census products. This special dataset provides counts of the number of households that fit certain combinations of HUD-specified housing needs, HUD-defined income limits (primarily 30, 50, and 80% of HAMFI), and household types of particular interest to planners and policy makers. To assess affordability and other types of housing needs, HUD defines four housing problems: 1. Cost burden: A household has a cost burden if its monthly housing costs (including mortgage payments, property taxes, insurance, and utilities for owners and rent and utilities for renters) exceed 30% of monthly income. 2. Overcrowding: A household is overcrowded if there is more than 1 person per room, not including kitchens and bathrooms. 3. Lack of complete kitchen facilities: A household lacks complete kitchen facilities if it lacks one or more of the following: cooking facilities, refrigerator, or a sink with piped water. 4. Lack of complete plumbing facilities: A household lacks complete plumbing facilities if it lacks one or more of the following: hot and cold piped water, a flush toilet, or a bathtub or shower. HUD also defines four severe housing problems, including a severe cost burden (more than 50% of monthly household income is spent on housing costs), severe overcrowding (more than 1.5 people per room, not including kitchens or bathrooms), lack of complete kitchen facilities (as described above), and lack of complete plumbing facilities (as described above). In the City of Fresno, 70,184 households or 43% of all households experience a housing problem. Twenty-eight percent, or 45,350 households, experience a severe housing problem. The most common housing problem in Fresno is severe cost burden, which affects both renters and homeowners in the greatest numbers. Table 7 shows that 31,030 households, or 44% of households with a housing problem, are severely cost burdened. An additional 22,650 households are cost burdened, spending between 30-50% of their income on housing costs. Together, 76% of all Fresno households with a housing problem are spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs. Cost burdens and severe cost burdens have the greatest impact on very low- income renters. Among cost burdened renters, 44% are very low income (earning between 0- 30% AMI). Among severely cost burdened renters, 62% are very low income. While affordability is the primary issue facing low- and moderate-income residents, overcrowding and substandard housing also affect these households. Fourteen percent (14%) of households with a housing problem (9,465 households) experience overcrowding. In addition, 5% (or 3,430 households) experience severe overcrowding and 2% (1,429 households) lack complete plumbing or kitchen facilities. Another 3% of households are identified as having zero or negative income. Housing problems not related to affordability affect nearly a quarter (24%) of all households with housing problems in Fresno. Other known housing problems outside of HUD- defined housing problems include blight and limited economic viability of neighborhoods (e.g. the co-location of affordable housing with employment centers and proximity to fresh food sources and other retail and service opportunities). Consolidated Plan FRESNO 37 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The remainder of this section characterizes local housing needs in more detail. The Market Analysis component of the Consolidated Plan identifies resources available to respond to these needs (public housing, tax credit and other subsidized properties, housing and services for the homeless, and others). TABLE 5 - HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT DEMOGRAPHICS Demographics Base Year: 2009 Most Recent Year: 2015 % Change Population 494,665 510,450 3% Households 151,392 161,915 7% Median Income $43,036.00 $41,531.00 -3% Data Source: 2005-2009 ACS (Base Year), 2011-2015 ACS (Most Recent Year) Number of Households Table TABLE 6 - TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS TABLE 0-30% HAMFI >30-50% HAMFI >50-80% HAMFI >80- 100% HAMFI >100% HAMFI Total Households 27,695 23,495 27,655 13,825 69,240 Small Family Households 10,690 9,765 10,880 5,965 33,810 Large Family Households 5,140 4,175 4,955 2,575 8,710 Household contains at least one person 62-74 years of age 3,175 3,855 4,795 2,375 14,725 Household contains at least one-person age 75 or older 1,950 3,140 3,445 1,725 4,985 Households with one or more children 6 years old or younger 9,355 7,060 7,265 3,295 9,845 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 38 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Housing Needs Summary Tables 1. Housing Problems (Households with one of the listed needs) TABLE 7 – HOUSING PROBLEMS TABLE Renter Owner 0-30% AMI >30- 50% AMI >50- 80% AMI >80- 100% AMI Total 0-30% AMI >30-50% AMI >50- 80% AMI >80- 100% AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Substandard Housing - Lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facilities 645 255 290 130 1,320 55 4 10 40 109 Severely Overcrowded - With >1.51 people per room (and complete kitchen and plumbing) 1,285 735 655 220 2,895 75 190 170 100 535 Overcrowded - With 1.01- 1.5 people per room (and none of the above problems) 2,630 1,970 2,230 605 7,435 305 500 760 465 2,030 Housing cost burden greater than 50% of income (and none of the above problems) 13,790 7,665 1,625 280 23,360 2,275 2,560 2,325 510 7,670 Housing cost burden greater than 30% of income (and none of the above problems) 2,020 4,540 7,410 2,000 15,970 525 1,415 3,075 1,665 6,680 Zero/negative Income (and none of the above problems) 1,655 0 0 0 1,655 525 0 0 0 525 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 39 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 2. Housing Problems 2 (Households with one or more Severe Housing Problems: Lacks kitchen or complete plumbing, severe overcrowding, severe cost burden) TABLE 8 – HOUSING PROBLEMS 2 Renter Owner 0-30% AMI >30-50% AMI >50-80% AMI >80- 100% AMI Total 0-30% AMI >30- 50% AMI >50- 80% AMI >80- 100% AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Having 1 or more of four housing problems 18,345 10,625 4,795 1,235 35,000 2,710 3,260 3,265 1,115 10,350 Having none of four housing problems 3,460 6,190 12,000 6,055 27,705 995 3,420 7,600 5,420 17,435 Household has negative income, but none of the other housing problems 1,655 0 0 0 1,655 525 0 0 0 525 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 40 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 3. Cost Burden > 30% TABLE 9 – COST BURDEN > 30% Renter Owner 0-30% AMI >30-50% AMI >50-80% AMI Total 0-30% AMI >30- 50% AMI >50- 80% AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Small Related 8,725 6,980 4,700 20,405 765 1,590 2,185 4,540 Large Related 4,285 2,280 1,375 7,940 485 935 1,190 2,610 Elderly 2,165 2,350 1,620 6,135 1,245 1,585 1,610 4,440 Other 4,715 2,850 2,540 10,105 640 325 950 1,915 Total need by income 19,890 14,460 10,235 44,585 3,135 4,435 5,935 13,505 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 41 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 4. Cost Burden > 50% TABLE 10 – COST BURDEN > 50% Renter Owner 0-30% AMI >30-50% AMI >50-80% AMI Total 0-30% AMI >30-50% AMI >50-80% AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Small Related 7,990 4,100 620 12,710 740 1,105 855 2,700 Large Related 3,890 1,055 95 5,040 365 575 125 1,065 Elderly 1,400 1,490 565 3,455 850 970 710 2,530 Other 4,105 1,905 465 6,475 560 255 690 1,505 Total need by income 17,385 8,550 1,745 27,680 2,515 2,905 2,380 7,800 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 42 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 5. Crowding (More than one person per room) TABLE 11 – CROWDING INFORMATION Renter Owner 0-30% AMI >30-50% AMI >50-80% AMI >80- 100% AMI Total 0-30% AMI >30- 50% AMI >50- 80% AMI >80- 100% AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Single family households 3,465 2,135 2,325 595 8,520 360 460 690 370 1,880 Multiple, unrelated family households 385 440 510 235 1,570 19 235 235 195 684 Other, non-family households 80 145 85 4 314 0 0 0 0 0 Total need by income 3,930 2,720 2,920 834 10,404 379 695 925 565 2,564 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 43 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe the number and type of single person households in need of housing assistance. Estimates of the number of non-elderly single person households in need of housing assistance are included in the “other, non-family” category of Tables 9 and 10. This category includes multi- person households whose members are unrelated (e.g., roommates, un-married partners, etc.). Fresno has 12,020 single-person or multi-person unrelated households that are both low- to moderate-income and spend more than 30% of their incomes on housing costs. Single-person and multi-person unrelated households make up approximately one-fifth (21%) of all cost burdened households. Renters of this household type experience cost burdens over five times the rate of “other, non-family” homeowners (84% versus 16%). Table 9 shows the number of Fresno households that are cost burdened, spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs. The table indicates that nearly half (47%) of all single- person renters who spend more than 30% of their income on housing costs are very low income. Single-person homeowners who are cost burdened are most likely to be moderate income (50%). Severe cost burdens, in which a household spends more than 50% of their income on housing costs, also have severe effects on single-person households. There are 6,475 “other, non-family” renter households that are severely cost burdened. Of these renter households, 63% are very low income. Amongst single-person homeowners, very low-income households make up 37% of severely cost burdened households; moderate income households make up 46%. In Table 11, CHAS data indicates that 314 “other, non-family” renter households experience overcrowding. Among households experiencing overcrowding, 46% are low-income renter households. CHAS data did not identify any overcrowded single-person owner households. Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance who are disabled or victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking. Data gathered from the 2011-2015 ACS estimates that there are 65,587 individuals with disabilities in Fresno, representing 13% of the population. There is no data available that shows housing needs or households with disabled persons, however, patterns found among CHAS data on household income and housing problems can be used to estimate the need for housing assistance among the disabled population. Assuming the pattern of low- to moderate-income households experiencing housing problems applies, poverty status data could indicate if disabled populations have a greater risk of experiencing housing problems. 2011-2015 ACS estimates that 31% of the disabled population falls below the poverty level of $11,770 for a single person in 2015. In comparison, households with incomes below 30% HAMFI comprised only 15% of all households in Fresno but accounted for 35% of all households experiencing one or more housing problems. Therefore, a larger proportion of low-income residents would likely indicate increased susceptibility to housing problems for disabled persons. Additionally, people with disabilities often face greater difficulty finding appropriate housing, given the scarcity of housing that is both affordable and accessible to people with disabilities. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 44 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Open Justice, a criminal justice database published by the California Department of Justice, reports that there were 5,499 domestic-violence related calls for assistance in Fresno in 2018.4 Compared to other cities in California, Fresno has the highest number of domestic-violence related calls, with 10.25 calls per 1,000 residents, exceeding the similarly-sized Sacramento which has 3.43 calls per 1,000 residents.5 Several agencies assist clients who have experienced domestic violence and need housing assistance. The Marjaree Mason Center reports in its 2017-2012 annual report that it provided 156 beds at two safe houses. Naomi’s House, a shelter for single, homeless women, offers 24 beds nightly. The Fresno Housing Authority also allows victims of domestic violence to have priority on its interest list. While other shelter and transitional housing providers exist, such as Rescue Mission and Evangel House, the gap between services and domestic violence calls may indicate the need for significant housing assistance for this population. What are the most common housing problems? CHAS data indicates that the most common housing problems in Fresno, regardless of tenure type, are unaffordable housing costs. Severe housing cost burdens affect 19% of all Fresno residents. Households with low and very-low incomes are particularly vulnerable to severe cost burdens. More than half (58%) of very low-income households and 44% of low-income households are severely cost burdened. Another 14% of all Fresno residents experience cost burdens. Cost burdens have their greatest impact on moderate-income households, affecting 38% of households earning 50-80% AMI. While affordability is the most common housing problem, overcrowding, severe overcrowding and substandard housing affect 12,764 households or 16% of Fresno’s low- to moderate-income households. Are any populations/household types more affected than others by these problems? Renters at nearly every income level are more likely than homeowners to experience at least one housing problem. Cost burdens affect renters at twice the rate of homeowners. Severe cost burdens affect renters at three times the rate of homeowners. This is particularly true for very low- income renters, who experience more cost burdens and severe cost burdens than all low- to middle-income homeowners combined. At low and moderate incomes, homeowners do experience greater instances of severe cost burden. At moderate and middle incomes homeowners experience a greater number of severe cost burdens than renters at the same income level. 4 OpenJustice. Domestic Violence-Related Calls for Assistance. Retrieved from: https://openjustice.doj.ca.gov/exploration/crime-statistics/domestic-violence-related-calls-assistance. 5 Sheehan, Tim. (2019, December 27). Fresno’s domestic violence rate tops California’s big cities. What’s behind the numbers? Retrieved from: https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article238114974.html. Accessed January 23, 2020. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 45 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Overcrowding also affects more renters than homeowners. Renters are 3 times more likely than homeowners to experience overcrowding, and 5 times more likely than homeowners to experience severe overcrowding. Describe the characteristics and needs of Low-income individuals and families with children (especially extremely low-income) who are currently housed but are at imminent risk of either residing in shelters or becoming unsheltered 91.205(c)/91.305(c)). Also discuss the needs of formerly homeless families and individuals who are receiving rapid re-housing assistance and are nearing the termination of that assistance According to 2011-2015 ACS estimates, 25% of Fresno residents live at or below the poverty level. Two-thirds of those residents spend more than 30% of their income for housing, not including childcare, medical or transportation costs. Low wages, rising rental costs, and the scarcity of affordable housing for low- and extremely low-income households place vulnerable households at even greater risk for eviction or homelessness. Individuals and families at imminent risk and those who have experienced homelessness and are receiving rapid re-housing assistance often face a myriad of barriers including prior histories of homelessness or eviction, chronic physical or mental disabilities, poor credit, criminal histories, and limited access to additional education or job skills training. The greatest need of formerly homeless families and individuals receiving rapid re-housing assistance is the availability of standard housing that is affordable to households at or below 50% AMI. For formerly homeless families and individuals nearing the termination of assistance, the top needs are for increased, sustainable income (earned and unearned); access to Social Security disability and other mainstream benefits; linkages to health, mental health, and legal services; access to affordable transportation and childcare; and ongoing case management and supportive services. If a jurisdiction provides estimates of the at-risk population(s), it should also include a description of the operational definition of the at-risk group and the methodology used to generate the estimates: Fresno’s 2015-2023 Housing Element provides a description of persons who are at risk of homelessness. The plan states, “Among the persons at-risk are those leaving institutions (mental hospitals, jail, etc.), victims of domestic violence, people doubled-up in unstable conditions, households with incomes of less than 30 percent of area median income and high housing expenses, farm workers and low-income single-person households. Specify particular housing characteristics that have been linked with instability and an increased risk of homelessness The most fundamental risk factor for homelessness is extreme poverty, leading to unaffordable rents or homeowner costs. Renters with incomes under 30% HAMFI and housing cost burdens over 50% are at risk of homelessness, especially if they experience a destabilizing event such as Consolidated Plan FRESNO 46 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) a job loss, reduction in work hours, or medical emergency/condition. Such factors may also put low income homeowners at risk of foreclosure and subsequent homelessness. NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole. Introduction This section assesses the housing needs of racial and ethnic groups at various income levels in comparison to needs at that income level as a whole to identify any disproportionately greater needs. According to HUD, a disproportionately greater need exists when members of a racial or ethnic group at a given income level experience housing problems at a greater rate (10 percentage points or more) than the income level as a whole. Tables 12 through 15 identify the number of households experiencing one or more of the four housing problems by householder race, ethnicity, and income level. The four housing problems include: (1) cost burdens (paying more than 30% of income for housing costs); (2) overcrowding (more than 1 person per room); (3) lacking complete kitchen facilities; and (4) lacking complete plumbing facilities. Income classifications include: • Very low income – up to 30% of area median income (AMI) or $12,458 for a family of four; • Low income – 30 to 50% AMI or $12,459 to $20,764 for a family of four; • Moderate income – 50 to 80% AMI or $20,765 to $33,224 for a family of four; and • Middle income – 80 to 100% AMI or $33,225 to $41,531 for a family of four. 0%-30% of Area Median Income Out of 27,695 very low-income households in Fresno, 23,605 (or 85%) have at least one housing problem. Pacific Islander households experience housing problems at a disproportionately high rate. All of the 40 very low-income Pacific Islander households have housing problems. Hispanic households make up the largest number of very low-income households with housing problems (11,710 households), though the rate of housing problems is not disproportionate (89%). Of the remaining very low-income households, 83% of Black households, 82% of white and Asian households and 58% of American Indian households have at least one housing problem. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 47 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) TABLE 12 - DISPROPORTIONALLY GREATER NEED 0 - 30% AMI Housing Problems Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 23,605 1,915 2,180 White 5,280 465 725 Black / African American 3,805 350 455 Asian 2,340 200 320 American Indian, Alaska Native 90 30 35 Pacific Islander 40 0 0 Hispanic 11,710 845 635 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30% 30%-50% of Area Median Income Of the 23,495 low income households in Fresno, 19,835 households (84%) have at least one housing problem. All 54 Pacific Islander households at this income level have a housing problem, signifying a disproportionate rate for this group. American Indian households have the second highest rate of housing problems (93%), followed by Black households (88%), Asian households (87%), Hispanic households (86%), and white households (78%). TABLE 13 - DISPROPORTIONALLY GREATER NEED 30 - 50% AMI Housing Problems Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 19,835 3,655 0 White 5,020 1,425 0 Black / African American 2,435 330 0 Asian 1,840 275 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 189 15 0 Pacific Islander 54 0 0 Hispanic 9,860 1,570 0 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30% Consolidated Plan FRESNO 48 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 50%-80% of Area Median Income Two-thirds (67%) of the 27,655 moderate income households in Fresno experience at least one housing problem. American Indian households at this income level experience a disproportionate rate of housing problems, with 83% (145 households) having a housing problem. Other racial and ethnic groups experience housing problems at a rate close to the city’s average. Housing problems affect 71% of moderate-income Asian households, as well as 68% of Black households, 67% of Pacific Islander and Hispanic households and 64% of white households. - TABLE 14 - DISPROPORTIONALLY GREATER NEED 50 - 80% AMI Housing Problems Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 18,545 9,110 0 White 5,590 3,110 0 Black / African American 1,315 605 0 Asian 1,740 700 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 145 30 0 Pacific Islander 20 10 0 Hispanic 9,325 4,505 0 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30% 80%-100% of Area Median Income Approximately 43% of all middle-income Fresno households have a housing problem (6,015 households). Asian households at this income level are disproportionately affected, with 56% having a housing problem. Black, Hispanic and white households have housing problems at or near the city’s average (44%, 43% and 42% respectively). American Indian and Pacific Islander households either did not indicate any middle income households with housing problems or indicated no households at this income level. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 49 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) TABLE 15 - DISPROPORTIONALLY GREATER NEED 80 - 100% AMI Housing Problems Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 6,015 7,815 0 White 1,965 2,745 0 Black / African American 380 475 0 Asian 745 575 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 0 20 0 Pacific Islander 0 0 0 Hispanic 2,800 3,715 0 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30% Discussion At low and very low incomes, Pacific Islander households experience disproportionately high rates of housing problems compared with the city’s average. At moderate incomes, housing problems disproportionately affect American Indian households. Finally, at middle incomes, Asian households experience a disproportionate rate of housing problems. While disproportionate rates of housing problems tell us about the comparative housing needs across all racial and ethnic groups, they do not fully indicate the level of need within each group. Pacific Islander households, as defined by US Census data, only make up 40 of the city’s very low-income households, 54 low-income households, and 30 moderate income households. Hispanic households, on the other hand, constitute the majority of households with housing needs. Over 40% of all very low-income Fresno households (11,710 households) are Hispanic households with housing problems. White households experience housing problems at lower rates than the city’s average at all income levels; however, the number of white households with a housing problem comes second to that of Hispanics at every income level as well. NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole. Introduction This section assesses the severe housing needs of racial and ethnic groups at various income levels in comparison to severe needs at that income level as a whole to identify any Consolidated Plan FRESNO 50 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) disproportionately greater needs. Like the preceding analysis, this section uses HUD’s definition of disproportionately greater need, which occurs when one racial or ethnic group at a given income level experiences housing problems at a rate that is at least 10 percentage points greater than the income level as a whole. Tables 16 through 19 identify the number of households with one or more of the severe housing needs by householder race and ethnicity. The four severe housing problems include: (1) severe cost burden (paying more than 50% of income for housing and utilities); (2) severe crowding (more than 1.5 people per room); (3) lack of complete kitchen facilities; and (4) lack of complete plumbing facilities. Income classifications include: • Very low income – up to 30% of area median income (AMI) or $12,458 for a family of four; • Low income – 30 to 50% AMI or $12,459 to $20,764 for a family of four; • Moderate income – 50 to 80% AMI or $20,765 to $33,224 for a family of four; and • Middle income – 80 to 100% AMI or $33,225 to $41,531 for a family of four. 0%-30% of Area Median Income Out of 27,690 very low-income households in the city of Fresno, 76% have one or more severe housing problem. Pacific Islander households are disproportionately affected at this income level, with 100% of the 40 Pacific Islander households experiencing a severe housing problem. Hispanic households have the second highest rate of housing problems (81%), followed by Asian households (75%), white households (71%), Black households (69%), and American Indian households (42%). TABLE 16 – SEVERE HOUSING PROBLEMS 0 - 30% AMI Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 21,055 4,455 2,180 White 4,590 1,155 725 Black / African American 3,205 945 455 Asian 2,135 405 320 American Indian, Alaska Native 64 55 35 Pacific Islander 40 0 0 Hispanic 10,710 1,840 635 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50% Consolidated Plan FRESNO 51 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 30%-50% of Area Median Income There are 13,885 low income households that have a severe housing problem, comprising 59% of the households at this income level. Pacific Islander households are disproportionately affected, with severe housing problems affecting 100% of the 54 Pacific Islander households. American Indian experience severe housing problems at a rate of 66%, followed by Black households (62%), Hispanic households (59%), white households (58%) and Asian households (56%). TABLE 17 – SEVERE HOUSING PROBLEMS 30 - 50% AMI Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 13,885 9,610 0 White 3,735 2,705 0 Black / African American 1,730 1,040 0 Asian 1,190 925 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 135 69 0 Pacific Islander 54 0 0 Hispanic 6,700 4,735 0 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50% 50%-80% of Area Median Income Out of 27,660 moderate income households in the city, 29% have a severe housing problem. At this income level, Pacific Islander households continue to have disproportionate rates of housing problems, with 67% having a severe housing problem. Asian households have the second highest rate of severe housing problems, 36%. All other racial and ethnic groups are at or below the city’s average; 29% of Hispanic, Black and white households have severe housing problems, as well as 6% of American Indian households. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 52 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) TABLE 18 – SEVERE HOUSING PROBLEMS 50 - 80% AMI Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 8,060 19,600 0 White 2,385 6,320 0 Black / African American 560 1,355 0 Asian 870 1,580 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 10 160 0 Pacific Islander 20 10 0 Hispanic 4,065 9,770 0 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50% 80%-100% of Area Median Income Seventeen percent (17%) of the city’s 13,825 middle income households have a severe housing problem. Asian households at this income level are disproportionately affected, with 32% having a severe housing problem. Nineteen percent of Hispanic households, 13% of white households and 11% of Black households also experience at least one severe housing problem at this income level. TABLE 19 – SEVERE HOUSING PROBLEMS 80 - 100% AMI Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 2,350 11,475 0 White 535 4,175 0 Black / African American 110 745 0 Asian 425 895 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 0 20 0 Pacific Islander 0 0 0 Hispanic 1,240 5,280 0 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS 0*The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50% Consolidated Plan FRESNO 53 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Discussion Hispanic households make up the majority of households at all income groups, as well as the majority of households with one or more severe housing problems. Fifty-one percent of all Hispanic households earning less than 100% AMI (22,715 households) have severe housing problems. Comparatively, white households, which make up the second largest number of households earning below 100% AMI, have severe housing problems at a rate of 43%. Only American Indian households experience severe housing problems at a lesser rate of 39%. All other groups experience severe housing problems at a rate higher than Hispanic households: Asian households (53%), Black households (55%), and Pacific Islander households (92%). At very low, low, and moderate incomes, Pacific Islander households continue to experience a disproportionately higher rate of severe housing problems than the city’s average. Asian households also have a disproportionate rate of severe housing problems at middle incomes. NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens – 91.205 (b)(2) Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole Introduction This section assesses the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole. While the preceding sections assessed all housing and severe housing problems, Table 20 focuses only on the share of income households spend on housing. Data is broken down into groups spending less than 30% of income on housing costs, those paying between 30 and 50% (i.e., with a cost burden), and those paying over 50% (i.e., with a severe cost burden). The final column, “no/negative income,” identifies households without an income, for whom housing as a share of income was not calculated. Housing Cost Burden TABLE 20 – GREATER NEED: HOUSING COST BURDENS AMI Housing Cost Burden <=30% 30-50% >50% No / negative income Jurisdiction as a whole 87,650 34,475 37,355 2,440 White 39,090 11,035 11,175 765 Black / African American 5,370 3,265 5,065 480 Asian 8,675 3,455 3,235 375 American Indian, Alaska Native 335 280 185 35 Pacific Islander 60 20 94 0 Hispanic 32,190 15,570 16,880 770 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 54 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Discussion Pacific Islanders, Black and American Indian households experience disproportionately greater rates of housing cost burden in Fresno than other racial or ethnic groups. While 44% of the city is housing cost burdened, 65% of Pacific Islander households, 59% of Black households and 56% of American Indian households are housing cost burdened. Hispanic households experience housing cost burdens at a rate of 50%, followed by Asian households (42%) and white households (36%). American Indian households have the highest rate of cost burden, with 34% spending between 30-50% of their incomes on housing costs. In total numbers, however, Hispanic and white households exhibit a higher number of households experiencing housing cost burden. There are 15,570 Hispanic households and 11,035 white households experiencing housing cost burdens. A similar pattern occurs with severe housing cost burdens. Pacific Islander households have the highest rate of severe cost burden, with 54% of the 174 Pacific Islander households spending over 50% of their incomes on housing costs. It should also be noted that there are 16,880 Hispanic households and 11,175 white households that also experience severe housing cost burden. NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion – 91.205(b)(2) Are there any Income categories in which a racial or ethnic group has disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category as a whole? Pacific Islander households experience disproportionately greater housing need at very low, low, and moderate-income levels. Pacific Islander households also experience the highest rate of housing cost burden amongst all households spending over 50% of their incomes on housing costs. Asian households experience disproportionately greater housing need at middle incomes. American Indian households have the highest rate of housing cost burden for households spending between 30-50% of their incomes on housing costs. Are any of those racial or ethnic groups located in specific areas or neighborhoods in your community? Figures 1 through 5 indicate that Fresnans of all racial and ethnic backgrounds live throughout the city of Fresno. However, some areas show greater clustering of racial and ethnic groups than others. Hispanic residents make up the largest share of Fresno residents at the decennial census (46.7%). However, fewer Hispanic residents are shown residing in northeast and northwest Fresno. Hispanic residents have their greatest presence in areas south of E. Clinton Ave and east of Highway 41, particularly in southeast Fresno. White residents, who make up the second largest share of Fresnans, primarily live north of Sequoia-Kings Canyon Freeway with clustering particularly in northeast and northwest Fresno. Asian and Pacific Islander residents show clustering patterns in various areas throughout the city, particularly in northeast Fresno between N. Cedar Avenue and the eastern city limit, along Consolidated Plan FRESNO 55 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sequoia-Kings Canyon Freeway east of Hwy 41, and along N. Cedar Avenue between E. Butler and E. California Avenues. Black residents in Fresno show clustering particularly in southwest Fresno, immediately west of Fresno State University, in southeast Fresno along S. Chestnut Avenue, and in west Fresno south of the railroad tracks along N. Santa Fe Avenue. Native American residents in Fresno tend to live north of the Sequoia Kings Canyon Freeway, but do not otherwise show patterns of clustering. FIGURE 1 – POPULATION BY BLOCK GROUP FOR HISPANIC RESIDENTS IN FRESNO, 2010 Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 56 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 2 – POPULATION BY BLOCK GROUP FOR WHITE, NON-HISPANIC RESIDENTS IN FRESNO, 2010 Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 57 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 3 – POPULATION BY BLOCK GROUP FOR ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER RESIDENTS IN FRESNO, 2010 Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 58 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 4 – POPULATION BY BLOCK GROUP FOR BLACK, NON-HISPANIC RESIDENTS IN FRESNO, 2010 Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 59 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 5 – POPULATION BY BLOCK GROUP FOR NATIVE AMERICAN RESIDENTS IN FRESNO, 2010 Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 60 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) NA-35 Public Housing – 91.205(b) Introduction Fresno residents are served by the Housing Authority of the City of Fresno (FH). Between public housing, Housing Choice Vouchers, project-based vouchers, and units under the Section 202 and Section 811 programs, a total of over 13,596 subsidized units are available in the city, housing 35,363 individual residents. Voucher programs are the primary source of these subsidized housing units representing 12,847 (94%) of these subsidized units (10,648 Housing Choice Vouchers and 2,199 Project-Based Vouchers). There are 651 units of conventional public housing and another 98 units designated for elderly and/or disabled households through the Section 202 and 811 programs. The FH provides a range of housing in the City of Fresno, including affordable housing, senior housing, permanent supportive housing, and market rate housing. PUBLIC HOUSING SUMMARY Units Available Residents Served Public Housing 651 1,827 Housing Choice Vouchers 10,648 29,207 Project Based Section 8 2,199 4,221 Section 202 79 88 Section 811 19 20 Total 13,596 35,363 Data Source: 2017 Picture of Subsidized Households, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/assthsg.html Consolidated Plan FRESNO 61 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Totals in Use TABLE 21 - PUBLIC HOUSING BY PROGRAM TYPE Program Type Certificate Mod- Rehab Public Housing Vouchers Total Project - based Tenant - based Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Family Unification Program Disabled* # of units vouchers in use 0 0 760 6,792 83 6,441 39 133 89 *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 62 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Characteristics of Residents TABLE 22 – CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENTS BY PROGRAM TYPE Program Type Certificate Mod- Rehab Public Housing Vouchers Total Project - based Tenant - based Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Family Unification Program Average Annual Income 0 0 11,498 11,936 9,842 11,933 9,401 12,627 Average length of stay 0 0 5 6 0 7 1 7 Average Household size 0 0 2 3 3 3 1 4 # Homeless at admission 0 0 1 10 1 7 2 0 # of Elderly Program Participants (>62) 0 0 106 754 3 726 2 3 # of Disabled Families 0 0 122 1,452 20 1,326 18 18 # of Families requesting accessibility features 0 0 760 6,792 83 6,441 39 133 # of HIV/AIDS program participants 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 # of DV victims 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 63 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Race of Residents TABLE 23 – RACE OF PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENTS BY PROGRAM TYPE Program Type Race Certifica te Mod- Rehab Public Housing Vouchers Total Project - based Tenant - based Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Family Unificatio n Program Disabled* White 0 0 496 4,001 49 3,753 33 111 51 Black/African American 0 0 161 2,208 22 2,143 6 18 18 Asian 0 0 87 466 8 438 0 1 17 American Indian/Alaska Native 0 0 12 102 3 93 0 3 3 Pacific Islander 0 0 4 15 1 14 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 64 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Ethnicity of Residents TABLE 24 – ETHNICITY OF PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENTS BY PROGRAM TYPE Program Type Ethnicity Certificate Mod- Rehab Public Housing Vouchers Total Project - based Tenant - based Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Family Unification Program Disabled* Hispanic 0 0 451 3,157 41 2,990 11 89 22 Not Hispanic 0 0 309 3,635 42 3,451 28 44 67 *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 65 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Section 504 Needs Assessment: Describe the needs of public housing tenants and applicants on the waiting list for accessible units: The data from HUD PIH Information Center shows Fresno as having 760 public housing units in use within the city, 122 (16%) of which are held by a family containing one or more people with a disability. Of the city’s 6,792 voucher units, 1,452 (21%) are occupied by a disable household. According to the HUD data, all 760 of the public housing residents and 6,792 voucher households captured in this reporting had requested units with accessibility features. As many people with disabilities live on limited incomes, often just a modest $771/month SSI payment, there are few options for them other than public housing. Availability of additional units with accessibility features is the greatest need of this population. Most immediate needs of residents of Public Housing and Housing Choice voucher holders Current residents in public and other assisted housing units are most immediately in need of opportunities and supports to grow and attain a level of self-sufficiency. These supports include programs in areas such as job training and assistance, childcare, transportation, health-related assistance, after school programs, adult education, and child educational enrichment. How do these needs compare to the housing needs of the population at large The needs of public housing residents and voucher holders are different from those of the city’s overall low- and moderate-income population primarily in that these residents are housed in stable and decent housing. With this need met, residents are able to work on other needs that families typically face in addition to housing insecurity. These other needs frequently include childcare, healthcare, employment, transportation, and food. NA-40 Homeless Needs Assessment – 91.205(c) Introduction This section provides an assessment of the City of Fresno’s homeless population and its needs. The Fresno Madera CoC conducts an annual homeless “Point-in-time Count” during the last ten days of January each year. The 2019 point-in-time count for Fresno and Madera counties was held on January 29, 2019. It counted 2,508 persons experiencing homelessness in total, including chronically homeless (698 persons, or 28 percent), unaccompanied and parenting youth households (134 persons, or 5 percent), persons in families with children (241, or 10 percent), and veterans (235, or 10 percent). If data is not available for the categories "number of persons becoming and exiting homelessness each year," and "number of days that persons experience homelessness," describe these categories for each homeless population type (including chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth): Consolidated Plan FRESNO 66 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Of the 2,508 homeless persons counted in the point-in-time count, 698 people were counted as chronically homeless (28 percent). Of the 698 chronically homeless persons, 23 were sheltered in emergency shelter (3 percent), none were in transitional housing, and 675 were unsheltered (97 percent). The 2019 point-in-time count counted 241 homeless persons in families with children (10 percent of total persons experiencing homelessness), 235 veterans (10 percent of total), and 134 persons in unaccompanied and parenting youth households (5 percent of total). The 241 persons in families with children included 81 households with 154 children under the age of 18. 225 of the 241 persons in these households were sheltered, with 186 persons (77 percent of total persons in family households with children) in emergency shelters and 39 (16 percent of total) in transitional housing. 16 persons in households of families with children were unsheltered (7 percent of total persons in family households with children). Of the 235 homeless veterans, 40 were in emergency shelters (17 percent), 29 were in transitional housing (12 percent), and 166 were unsheltered (71 percent). Unaccompanied youth households included 112 unaccompanied youth, 7 parenting youth, and 15 children of parenting youth. Of the 112 unaccompanied youth, 21 were in emergency shelters (19 percent), 7 were in transitional housing (6 percent), and 84 were unsheltered (75 percent). Of the 22 parenting youth and children in parenting youth households, 16 were in emergency shelters (73 percent), and 6 were in transitional housing (27 percent). Note that these figures do not represent the entire homeless population in the counties, but rather the number of homeless that were sheltered and unsheltered during a point-in-time count. As the inventory of homeless facilities in the area shows, a considerably higher number of homeless persons are assisted within Fresno and Madera counties than the point-in-time count of chronically homeless reflects. Nature and Extent of Homelessness: (Optional) Nature and Extent of Homelessness Race Sheltered Unsheltered White 323 1,359 African American 78 352 Asian 8 30 American Indian/ Alaskan Native 12 239 Native Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander 7 36 Multiple Races 11 53 Ethnicity Sheltered Unsheltered Non-Hispanic/ Non-Latino 210 1,132 Hispanic/ Latino 229 937 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 67 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance for families with children and the families of veterans. The 2019 point-in-time count identified 81 households experiencing homelessness with at least one adult and one child, which included a total of 241 people, 154 of whom were under the age of 18 (66 percent). Of the 241 persons in households with at least one adult and one child, 225 (93 percent) were sheltered in emergency or transitional housing, and 16 (7 percent) were unsheltered. Of the 235 veterans counted during the point-in-time count, 69 (29 percent) were sheltered and 166 (71 percent) were unsheltered. Describe the Nature and Extent of Homelessness by Racial and Ethnic Group. The point-in-time count categorized the number of sheltered and unsheltered individuals who were homeless in Fresno and Madera counties by race and ethnicity. The count found that 67 percent of all sheltered and unsheltered individuals were white, 17 percent were Black, and 10 percent were American Indian or Alaskan Native. People who identified as Asian, Native Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander, and multiple races each comprised 3 percent or less of sheltered and unsheltered individuals in Fresno and Madera counties. Regarding ethnicity, the count found that 46 percent of the total sheltered and unsheltered homeless population in Fresno and Madera counties were Hispanic/ Latino, and 54 percent were non-Hispanic/ Latino. Describe the Nature and Extent of Unsheltered and Sheltered Homelessness. The 2019 point-in-time count counted a total of 2,508 homeless persons, including 439 sheltered (18 percent) and 2,069 unsheltered persons (82 percent). Of the 439 sheltered individuals, 353 (80 percent) were in emergency shelters, and 86 (20 percent) were in transitional housing. Discussion Data from both the point-in-time count and stakeholder input indicate a high level of need for homelessness services in the City of Fresno. Survey respondents also rated all homeless services at high levels of need. In particular, 80 percent of survey respondents rated homeless prevention as a high need, and 73 percent rated transitional/ supportive housing and permanent housing as high needs. Access to homeless shelters and permanent housing were rated as high needs by 72 percent of survey respondents. NA-45 Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment - 91.205 (b,d) Introduction This section discusses the characteristics and needs of persons in various subpopulations of the City of Fresno who are not necessarily homeless but may require supportive services, including persons with HIV/AIDS, the elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical, or developmental), persons with alcohol or drug addiction, victims of domestic violence, and persons with a criminal record and their families. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 68 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) HOPWA TABLE 25 – HOPWA DATA Current HOPWA formula use: Cumulative cases of AIDS reported Data no longer available Area incidence of AIDS Data no longer available Rate per population Data no longer available Number of new cases prior year (3 years of data) Data no longer available Rate per population (3 years of data) Data no longer available Current HIV surveillance data: Number of Persons living with HIC (PLWH) 1,801 Area Prevalence (PLWH per population) 232.6 per 100,000 population Number of new HIV cases reported in 2017 158 Data Source: CDC HIV Surveillance HIV Housing Need (HOPWA Grantees Only) TABLE 26 – HIV HOUSING NEED Type of HOPWA Assistance Estimates of Unmet Need Tenant based rental assistance 4 Short-term Rent, Mortgage, and Utility 10 Facility Based Housing (Permanent, short-term or transitional) 20 Data Source: HOPWA CAPER and HOPWA Beneficiary Verification Worksheet Describe the characteristics of special needs populations in your community: Elderly and Frail Elderly According to the 2013-2017 ACS 5-year estimates, 10.3 percent of the City of Fresno’s population is elderly, aged 65 and over. 4.3 percent of the population is considered frail elderly, aged 75 and over. Slightly less than half (45.1 percent) of elderly individuals aged 65 and over in the city have a disability. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 69 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Persons with Disabilities Within the city, 13.9 percent of all residents have one or more disabilities, including: • Hearing difficulty – 3.8 percent • Vision difficulty – 3.5 percent • Cognitive difficulty – 6.5 percent • Ambulatory difficulty – 7.9 percent • Self-care difficulty- 3.5 percent • Independent living difficulty – 7.7 percent FIGURE 6- DISABILITY BY TYPE Persons with HIV/AIDS and their families As of 2017, there were approximately 1,801 persons living with HIV in the Fresno MSA region, a rate of 232.6 people living with HIV per 100,000 population. Of the total persons living with HIV in the region as of 2017, 1,482 were adult and adolescent men and 319 were adult and adolescent women. There were 158 new diagnoses in 2017, a rate of 20.2 new diagnoses per 100,000 population. 143 of the 158 new diagnoses were of adult and adolescent men, and 15 were of adult and adolescent women. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 70 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Immigrants and Refugees An estimated 104,829 residents of the City of Fresno are foreign-born, according to American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates for 2013-2017. Of these residents, an estimated 11,614 (11.1 percent) began residing in the United States in 2010 or later. Of the foreign-born population, approximately 43.3 percent are naturalized citizens, and 56.7 percent are not citizens.6 Of the foreign-born population who entered the United States in 2010 or later, an estimated 64.1 percent were born in Asia, 29.5 percent were born in Latin America, and 4.1 percent were born in Europe. Persons with Alcohol or Drug Addiction The region that includes the City of Fresno and its surrounding counties has an estimated 6.77 percent rate of alcohol use disorder in the past year by individuals aged 12 and older, according to 2014-2016 data from the US Substance Abuse & Mental Health Data Archive (SAMHDA). Cocaine use in the region was estimated at 2.06 percent of the population, and heroin use was estimated at 0.21%.7 There were an estimated 408 drug overdose deaths in Fresno County from 2015 to 2017, a rate of 14 persons per 100,000 population.8 Victims of Domestic Violence The Centers for Disease Control estimates that 34.9 percent of women and 31.1 percent of men in California have experienced any contact sexual violence, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner in their lifetimes.9 This equates to an estimated 92,352 women and 79,124 men living in Fresno, based on the city’s 2017 total population of 519,037.10 5.1 percent of women and 6.4 percent of men have experienced any contact sexual violence, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner in the past 12 months, equating to an estimated 13,496 women and 16,283 men in Fresno. Re-entry Populations In the state of California, an estimated 236,000 residents are on probation, and 90,000 are on parole.11 As of 2018, there were more than 10,000 adults under probation in Fresno County’s Adult Services Division.12 The large numbers of county residents under criminal justice 6 2013-2017 American Community Survey Estimates for Selected Characteristics of the Foreign-Born Population by Period of Entry into the United States, Table S0502 7 Substance Abuse & Mental Health Data Archive. “Interactive National Survey on Drug Use and Health Substate Estimates.” https://pdas.samhsa.gov/saes/substate 8 County Health Rankings & Roadmaps. “Drug Overdose Deaths.” https://www.countyhealthrankings.org/ 9 National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) | 2010-2012 State Report. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/NISVS-StateReportBook.pdf 10 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates for Total Population in the City of Fresno, Table DP05 11 Prison Policy Initiative. (n.d.) California Profile. Retrieved from: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/profiles/CA.html 12 Fresno County Probation Department. (2018). 2017-2018 Annual Report. Retrieved from: https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/home/showdocument?id=37231 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 71 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) supervision indicates a continuing need to address the housing and supportive service needs of this population in Fresno. What are the housing and supportive service needs of these populations and how are these needs determined? The primary housing and supportive needs of these subpopulations (the elderly, frail elderly, persons with disabilities, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, persons with alcohol or drug addiction, victims of domestic violence, and reentry populations) were determined by input from both service providers and the public through the Housing and Community Needs Survey, public meetings, and stakeholder interviews. Housing that is Affordable, Accessible, Safe, and Low-Barrier For all vulnerable populations, the high cost of housing is an issue. A high percentage of residents within these population subgroups live at or below the federal poverty level. Low incomes force many people with special needs to live in congregate care, have roommates, or live with family. HUD’s fair market rent documentation for FY 2020 estimates fair market rent for a two-bedroom unit in the Fresno metro as $980 per month.13 High housing costs make it difficult for vulnerable populations, who often live on very low incomes, to afford housing. Because of the high cost of housing, there is a need to increase the availability of affordable housing for vulnerable populations. This could include options such as smaller housing units; accessory dwelling units; cohousing with shared services; and other housing types that support increased levels of affordability. For the elderly and frail elderly, people with disabilities, and others that may not have access to vehicles, there is a need for housing that is accessible to transportation, recreation, and employment. Group homes and other housing options for people with disabilities are often located outside of urban communities and provide low levels of access to transit and walkability. These groups need housing options that are integrated into the community and reduce social isolation. Persons living with HIV/AIDS need low-barrier housing free from requirements surrounding drug testing, sobriety, criminal background, and medical appointments. Stakeholders working with persons living with HIV/AIDS and/or the HOPWA program emphasized that a ‘housing first’ model, in which permanent housing is provided without other barriers, is needed. Similar to other vulnerable populations, persons living with HIV/AIDS need housing that provides easy access to health services, resources, and employment. Housing may be inaccessible to vulnerable populations for a variety of reasons. Persons with disabilities may find that their housing options are not ADA compliant or are outside the service range for public transportation. People living with HIV/AIDS, immigrants and refugees, people 13 HUD User (n.d.). Fresno HUD Metro FMR Area Small Area FY 2020 Fair Market Rents. Retrieved from: https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/fmr/fmrs/FY2020_code/2020summary.odn Consolidated Plan FRESNO 72 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) with criminal histories, and other vulnerable populations are often discriminated against in housing application processes. Housing that is safe and clean is another need for vulnerable population groups. Units that are not clean or have other unhealthy conditions can worsen health issues for groups that are already vulnerable, such as persons living with HIV/AIDS. Transportation Access to transportation is an important concern for vulnerable population groups. Persons with disabilities and others without access to vehicles need housing in close proximity to transportation services in order to access employment, health services, and recreation opportunities. If transit is not within walking distance, vulnerable populations need accessible, reliable transportation services to provide access to everyday needs. Specifically, persons with intellectual or developmental disabilities may need companion assistance in transportation services in order to reach their destinations. Persons with HIV/AIDS need housing nearby transportation services in order to access health services and other resources. Accessible, reliable transportation also makes it easier for service providers to reach people for in-home services. Specialized Housing and Supportive Services Specialized housing is often needed to target needs of specific vulnerable populations. For example, people with intellectual or developmental disabilities and people with alcohol or drug addiction have specific housing needs that may be addressed through housing with wraparound services. Specifically, people with intellectual or developmental disabilities often need programming such as case management or life skills programming that does not violate direct service requirements. Persons living with HIV/AIDS may also need case management services and other supportive services, although stakeholders interviewed as part of this planning process emphasized that supportive services should not be required for people living with HIV/AIDS to access housing. Workforce Development and Employment Services Vulnerable populations may also need workforce development and employment services. These programs may include employment navigation, job training, education, transportation services, and case management focused on employment, among others. Physical and Mental Health and Treatment Services Access to healthcare is a need for vulnerable populations. Stakeholders and focus group participants noted a need for increased access to mental and physical health services for low- income residents. Stakeholders also emphasized a need for a wider range of drug and alcohol outpatient services. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 73 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Education/Combating Perceptions Combatting stigmas is an important concern for many vulnerable populations. In particular, for adults with criminal histories and people living with HIV/AIDS, it may be especially difficult to find adequate housing. Stakeholders noted that landlords often perceive persons with criminal histories or people living with HIV/AIDS as high-risk applicants. Because of this, they noted that others frequently get priority over these groups in accessing housing. Further, a lack of understanding regarding the transmission of HIV may cause people to lose housing or employment, and many people become homeless for this reason. Outreach Outreach to vulnerable populations to ensure they are aware of available services is another need. This includes development of relationships and trust so that people feel comfortable seeking out needed services. There is also a need to provide clarity in marketing and in public buildings about what services are available. Discuss the size and characteristics of the population with HIV/AIDS and their families within the Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area: The Fresno region ranked 17th among Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) in the rate of diagnoses of HIV infection as of 2017.14 There were 158 new diagnoses in the MSA in 2017, a rate of 20.2 new diagnoses per 100,000 population. 143 of the 158 new diagnoses were of adult and adolescent men, and 15 were of adult and adolescent women. 127 of the 143 newly diagnosed men contracted HIV from male-to-male sexual contact. 13 of the 15 newly diagnosed women contracted HIV from heterosexual contact. At the end of 2016, there were a total of 1,801 persons living with HIV in the region, a rate of 232.6 cases per 100,000 population. Of the total persons living with HIV in the region as of 2017, 1,482 were adult and adolescent men and 319 were adult and adolescent women. Teens and men aged 13 to 24 had the highest number of new cases (46), followed men aged 25 to 34 (43 cases). Men aged 25 to 34 were diagnosed with HIV at the highest rate (55.2 diagnoses per 100,000 population in 2017), followed by teens and men aged 13 to 24 (51.8 new diagnoses per 100,000 population). Although younger men tended to be diagnosed more frequently, almost half of adult men living with the disease are over age 45 (820, or 46 percent), and almost one in four are aged 55 and over (417, or 23 percent). New diagnoses for women occurred in small numbers across all age groups, with the highest rate of diagnoses occurring amongst women aged 35 to 44 (8.2 new diagnoses per 100,000 population). About 3 in 5 women living with HIV are over 45 (61 percent), and almost one third (31 percent) are aged 55 and over. 14 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017). Diagnoses of HIV Infection among Adults and Adolescents in Metropolitan Statistical Areas--United States and Puerto Rico, 2017. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/library/reports/surveillance/cdc-hiv-surveillance-supplemental-report-vol-24- 2.pdf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 74 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) By race and ethnicity, the largest number of new diagnoses occurred amongst Hispanic adult and adolescent males. In 2017, there were 89 new diagnoses for Hispanic/ Latino males, 27 for white males, 15 for Black/ African American males, 7 for Asian males and 1 for American Indian/Alaskan native males. Black males experienced the highest rate of infection at 80.9 cases per 100,000 persons, compared to 44.9 for Hispanic males and 21.9 for white males. There were 789 Hispanic/ Latino male adults or adolescents living with the disease in the Fresno region, the highest number of any population group. Hispanic/ Latino women had the highest number of new diagnoses amongst women, with 8 of the 15 new cases among women in 2017. Black women experienced the highest rate of new diagnoses among women at 11 diagnoses per 100,000 compared to 4.1 for Hispanic/ Latino women and 1.5 for white women. Hispanic women had the highest numbers for women living with HIV in the region, making up 142 of the 319 women in the region living with HIV (45 percent). Data is not available regarding prevalence and diagnoses of AIDS at the metro, county, or city level. NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs – 91.215 (f) Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Facilities Buildings and infrastructure open to the general public, whether owned by the government or by nonprofits, may be considered public facilities under the CDBG program. Survey respondents in the City of Fresno ranked public facility needs in the community as follows, with one as the highest priority: 1. Homeless and domestic violence shelters 2. Community parks, gyms, and recreational fields 3. Youth centers 4. Health care facilities 5. Community centers In particular, homeless and domestic violence shelters were rated as a high need by 71 percent of survey respondents and as a moderate need by 22 percent of respondents. Community parks, gyms, and recreational fields were rated as a high need by 62 percent of respondents and as a moderate need by 23 percent of respondents. 57 percent of respondents rated youth centers as a high need, and 31 percent rated them as a moderate need. In addition to the needs rated in the survey, participants noted a need for: • Maintenance of facilities located in south Fresno • Community centers, libraries, parks and landscaping in central, south, and west Fresno • Increasing the availability and quality of parks and libraries in south Fresno • Substance abuse, domestic violence, and homeless shelters available evenly throughout the community • Low- or no-barrier overnight and daytime shelters Consolidated Plan FRESNO 75 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Low-barrier transitional housing • Shelters and housing that provide supportive services • Shelters focused on LGBTQ and transgender populations • Domestic violence shelters that accept pets • Areas for people who are homeless to park cars or camp • Space in vacant buildings for nonprofits to provide public services • Redevelopment of vacant properties • Adaptive reuse of vacant buildings as affordable housing • Mobile home rehab • Efforts to support energy efficiency in housing • Shaded play structures and water features in parks • Investment in areas that have experienced disinvestment • A centrally located senior center Public facility goals identified in the City of Fresno General Plan (2015-2023) and other local plans include: • Expand the availability of permanent supportive housing, so our homeless residents can move from constant crisis, into safe, stable and supported housing until they are self- sufficient. • Focus funding efforts on increasing the number of Neighborhood and Community Parks, especially within the areas south of Shaw Avenue • Seek dedicated funding sources for parkland acquisition, improvement, and ongoing maintenance costs, in both growth areas and established neighborhoods • Identify underutilized and vacant land within the city that can be acquired and developed as parks to meet the needs of existing residents and cure deficiencies in established neighborhoods How were these needs determined? The public facility needs listed above were generated based on input from multiple stakeholders consulted through interviews, public meetings, and a community survey completed by 500 city residents and stakeholders. Stakeholders included City staff and elected officials, Fresno Housing Authority staff, nonprofit organizations, homeless housing and service providers, organizations serving people with disabilities, housing developers, civic organizations, and Fresno residents. Needs were also determined based on a review of previous local and regional plans, such as the Fresno General Plan (2015-2023), Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018), the Fresno Madera 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness (2006-2016), the Fresno Parks Master Plan (2017), and the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (2016). Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Improvements: Survey respondents rated street, road, or sidewalk improvements as the highest public improvement need in the city. 69 percent of survey takers identified these improvements as a high Consolidated Plan FRESNO 76 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) need, 22 percent identified them as a moderate need. Biking or walking trails were also rated as a high need by 46 percent of survey respondents and as a moderate need by 30 percent of respondents. Survey respondents also prioritized ADA accessibility improvements, with 28 percent of respondents identifying them as a high need for the city and 43 percent identifying them as a moderate need. In addition to the needs rated in the survey, respondents also described a need for: • Improved lighting • Crosswalks and other pedestrian infrastructure • Bus stop shelters, trash cans and benches • ADA accessibility improvements in mobile home parks, and • Street trees Figure 7 shows the public facility and infrastructure needs in the city as ranked by survey respondents: FIGURE 7 – PUBLIC FACILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Public improvement needs identified in the City of Fresno General Plan (2015-2023) and other local plans include: • Provide safe, well-maintained, accessible streets • Implement ADA accessibility improvements • Create an urban form that facilitates multi-modal connectivity Consolidated Plan FRESNO 77 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Create unified plans for Green Streets, using distinctive features reflecting Fresno’s landscape heritage • Preserve and strengthen Fresno’s overall image through design review and create a safe, walkable and attractive urban environment for the current and future generations of residents • Establish and maintain a continuous, safe, and easily accessible bikeways system throughout the metropolitan area to reduce vehicle use, improve air quality and the quality of life, and provide public health benefits • Establish a well-integrated network of pedestrian facilities to accommodate safe, convenient, practical, and inviting travel by walking, including for those with physical mobility and vision impairments How were these needs determined? The public improvement needs detailed above were generated based on input from multiple stakeholders consulted through interviews, public meetings, and a survey. These stakeholders included City staff and elected officials, Fresno Housing Authority staff, nonprofit organizations, homeless housing and service providers, organizations serving people with disabilities, housing developers, civic organizations, and Fresno residents. Needs were also determined based on a review of previous local and regional plans, such as the Fresno General Plan (2015-2023), Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018), the Fresno Madera 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness (2006-2016), the Fresno Parks Master Plan (2017), and the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (2016). Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Services: Public services, such as case management, childcare, transportation assistance, job training, and programming for youth and senior centers, are important to the City’s community development strategy. Needs identified by respondents to the Housing and Community Needs Survey were ranked as follows, with one as the highest priority: 1. Neighborhood cleanups 2. Drug education/ crime prevention 3. Child abuse prevention 4. After school services 5. Employment training 6. Domestic abuse services 7. Youth services 8. Medical and dental services 9. Food banks/ community meals 10. Job search assistance 11. Transportation assistance 12. Senior services 13. Housing counseling 14. Legal services Consolidated Plan FRESNO 78 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) In particular, neighborhood cleanups were noted as a high need by 59 percent of survey respondents and as moderate needs by 31 percent of respondents. Drug abuse education/ crime prevention was noted as a high need by 61 percent of survey respondents and as a moderate need by 27 percent of respondents. 58 percent of respondents ranked child abuse prevention as a high need, and 29 percent ranked it as a moderate need. Survey participants and stakeholders also noted a need for additional services, including • LGBTQ-inclusive services and programming • Affordable childcare • Home visits for senior care • Senior programming • Mental health services • Enforcement of public safety in alleyways • Social programs, including mental health, recovery, recreation, job training, and food access • Improved public education • Mentoring programs • Municipal broadband • 24/7 bus service • Housing support • Parenting programs Figure 8 shows the public service needs as ranked by survey respondents. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 79 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 8- PUBLIC SERVICE NEEDS IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Public service needs identified in the City of Fresno General Plan (2015-2023) and other local plans include: • Provide youth development opportunities • Expand the range and availability of homelessness prevention strategies, increase immediate accessibility, and improve their long-term effectiveness • Provide transitional case managed services at all levels of homeless service access, especially in emergency shelter facilities and prior to discharge from public care programs/institutions, to ensure linkage to appropriate and necessary community resources and supports • Increase the level of coordinated and comprehensive services provision to the hard to serve and those who are not served, in areas of mental health, physical health and social wellbeing • Increase opportunities and avenues for community individual and business partnerships that will promote housing availability, employment and promote broader formal community supports • Increase job training, skills development and employment opportunities to increase self- reliance, decrease reliance on public supports and promote successful independent living and self-sufficiency Consolidated Plan FRESNO 80 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Support local business startups and encourage innovation by improving access to resources and capital and help overcome obstacles hampering economic development. • Cultivate a skilled, educated, and well-trained workforce by increasing educational attainment and the relevant job skill levels in order to appeal to local and nonlocal businesses • Maintain and improve community appearance through programs that prevent and abate blighting influences. How were these needs determined? The public services needs listed above were generated based on input from multiple stakeholders consulted through interviews, focus groups, public meetings, and a survey. These stakeholders included City staff and elected officials, Fresno Housing Authority staff, nonprofit organizations, homeless housing and service providers, organizations serving people with disabilities, housing developers, civic organizations, and Fresno residents. Needs were also determined based on a review of previous local and regional plans, such as the Fresno General Plan (2015-2023), Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018), the Fresno Madera 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness (2006-2016), the Fresno Parks Master Plan (2017), and the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (2016). Consolidated Plan FRESNO 81 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS MA-05 Overview Housing Market Analysis Overview While housing choices can be fundamentally limited by household income and purchasing power, the lack of affordable housing can be a significant hardship for low- and moderate-income households, preventing them from meeting other basic needs. Stakeholders and residents reported that affordable housing for families and individuals is a significant issue in the city of Fresno. While American Community Survey data shows that rents in the city have increased relatively moderately since 2010, there is a lack of housing in the city that is affordable to low- and moderate-income residents, and a high proportion of residents are cost-burdened or severely cost-burdened by housing costs. In addition to reviewing the current housing market conditions, this section analyzes the availability of assisted and public housing and facilities to serve homeless individuals and families. It also analyzes local economic conditions and summarizes existing economic development resources and programs that may be used to address community and economic development needs identified in the Needs Assessment. MA-10 Number of Housing Units – 91.210(a)&(b)(2) Introduction The 2011-2015 Five-Year American Community Survey estimates that there are 174,590 housing units in the City of Fresno (see Table 27). The largest share of units are single-family detached structures (61 percent), followed by units in small multifamily buildings of 5 to 19 units (14 percent). About 13 percent of the region’s units are in duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes. Units in large multifamily buildings (20 or more units) account for 7 percent of housing units, and 1-unit attached structures account for 3 percent of units. There are an estimated 4,105 units of other types of housing in the city, including mobile homes, RVs, and vans, which make up 2 percent of residences in the city. About 47 percent of the city’s units are owner-occupied, and 53 percent are renter-occupied (see Table 28). A large majority of owned housing in the city have at least two bedrooms: 15 percent have two bedrooms and 84 percent have three or more bedrooms. Rental units tend to be smaller: 22 percent of units are studios or one-bedroom units. The most common rental unit contains two bedrooms (43 percent), while more than one third (35 percent) of renters live in homes with three or more bedrooms. Input from stakeholders indicates that new construction of affordable rental units is the greatest housing need in the community. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 82 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) All residential properties by number of units TABLE 27 – RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES BY UNIT NUMBER Property Type Number % 1-unit detached structure 106,675 61% 1-unit, attached structure 4,985 3% 2-4 units 22,350 13% 5-19 units 24,980 14% 20 or more units 11,495 7% Mobile Home, boat, RV, van, etc 4,105 2% Total 174,590 100% Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Unit Size by Tenure TABLE 28 – UNIT SIZE BY TENURE Owners Renters Number % Number % No bedroom 320 0% 3,200 4% 1 bedroom 845 1% 15,265 18% 2 bedrooms 11,230 15% 37,010 43% 3 or more bedrooms 63,605 84% 30,435 35% Total 76,000 100% 85,910 100% Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Describe the number and targeting (income level/type of family served) of units assisted with federal, state, and local programs. According to the Fresno Housing Authority, more than 17,000 households were served with publicly assisted housing in 2019. The Fresno Housing Authority utilizes several types of assistance, including public housing, low-income housing tax credits, and housing choice vouchers. Through these programs, the Fresno Housing Authority manages 2,290 units of public housing; 2,414 LIHTC units, including 118 units of permanent supportive housing; and nearly 13,000 housing choice vouchers.15 Data on assisted housing from HUD indicate that 630 public housing units are located within the city of Fresno.16There are also 59 tax credit properties that together provide 5,794 units of housing 15 Fresno Housing Authority (n.d.) Portfolio. Retrieved from: http://fresnohousing.org/about/portfolio/ 16 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2019). Assisted Housing: National and Local. Retrieved from: https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/assthsg.html#null Consolidated Plan FRESNO 83 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) affordable to households with incomes at or below 60% AMI,17 and 2,203 Project Based Section 8 units in the city.18 Other multifamily properties include housing developed through HUD’s Section 202 and 811 programs, which provide affordable supportive housing for seniors and people with disabilities. Provide an assessment of units expected to be lost from the affordable housing inventory for any reason, such as expiration of Section 8 contracts. The Housing Element of the City’s General Plan notes that from 2015 to 2025, 1,449 units of federally assisted housing are at risk of converting to market-rate housing because of contracts that allow owners of project-based Section 8 units to opt out every five years.19 However, affordability covenants on individual projects or ownership by mission-driven nonprofit organizations may prevent conversion of some units. The plan also notes that all LIHTC projects placed into service up to 2010 may be at risk of conversion to market-rate housing, as they have passed the initial 15-year compliance period and owners may be permitted to exit the LIHTC program under certain circumstances. While HUD statistics indicate that most LIHTC properties remain affordable despite having passed the 15- year period of compliance, the complex nature of affordability restrictions associated with these projects put them at some level of risk of conversion. In total, the plan estimates that there are 5,339 affordable units (including both federal and LIHTC units) at risk of conversion to market-rate housing. The cost of developing replacement units is estimated at $1 billion. In addition to concerns surrounding the risk of conversion of federal and LIHTC affordable units, increases in housing prices and a loss of ‘naturally occurring’ affordable housing pose additional risks to low- and moderate-income households. Stakeholders interviewed as part of this planning process described increasing housing costs and a lack of affordable housing stock as primary concerns. Cost burden data shows that affordability needs are particularly severe for renters with incomes under 30% of HUD Area Median Family Income (HAMFI), affecting over 15,000 households. Input collected from stakeholders and public meeting attendees strongly suggests that a scarcity of affordable rental units combined with low incomes and high unemployment makes housing increasingly unaffordable to Fresno residents. On the ownership side, income and home value data indicate that starter home prices in the city are out of reach for many moderate- and middle- income households. Affordability data in the 17 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (n.d.) LIHTC Database. Retrieved from: https://lihtc.huduser.gov/ 18 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2019). Assisted Housing: National and Local. Retrieved from: https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/assthsg.html#null 19 City of Fresno. (2017). Fresno General Plan: 2015-2023 Housing Element. Retrieved from: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2018/01/FresnoHEAdoptedApril2017smallfile.pdf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 84 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Needs Assessment supports this, with cost burdens impacting considerable shares of households up to 100% HAMFI. In terms of unit size, overcrowding impacts a large number of households, particularly renters. Considering that the majority of rental units contain two bedrooms or fewer (65 percent), future affordable housing development should reflect continued need for 3+ bedroom rental units for larger families. Describe the need for specific types of housing: Data discussed in the Housing Need Assessment and in the following section indicates the need for rental housing for very low-income households. The greatest need is for affordable rental housing units, particularly units that are affordable to households with income at or below 30 percent of the area median income. Stakeholders interviewed in the development of the Consolidated Plan also emphasized the need for: • Affordable rental housing, including multifamily housing • Affordable homeownership opportunities, including starter homes • Affordable senior housing • Affordable housing for a variety of family sizes • Housing affordable to people with very low incomes (30% AMI and below) • Housing accessible to people with disabilities, with supportive services • Housing that accepts Housing Choice Vouchers • Housing rehab for elderly residents • Family housing • Housing with supportive services, including case management services, medical, mental health, childcare • Housing with supportive services for people transitioning from homelessness • Rehabilitation of existing housing stock • Housing in safe areas with access to opportunity MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing - 91.210(a) Introduction This section reviews housing costs and affordability in the City of Fresno. The median home value in the city is estimated at $177,500 (see Table 29). Home values in the city fell during the years following the Great Recession and have not recovered to pre-recession levels (see Figure 9). Median rent is $758 in the City of Fresno, an 8 percent increase since 2009. 60.6 percent of the city’s rental units cost between $500 and $999 per month, and 15.5 percent have rents under $500 per month. Rental rates are $1,000 or more for about 24 percent of rental housing units (see Table 30). Median rents in the city have increased moderately but consistently since 2009 (see Figure 10). Consolidated Plan FRESNO 85 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The need for improvement or construction of affordable housing is one of the most commonly identified housing issues in the city, with data and local perceptions both indicating affordability issues, particularly for households with incomes below 80% of the area median. Ability to afford housing is tied to other needs identified in the city, including homelessness, housing and services for people with disabilities, housing and services for people living with HIV/AIDS, senior housing, and availability of housing for people re-entering the community from long-term care facilities or other institutions. Cost of Housing TABLE 29 – COST OF HOUSING Base Year: 2009 Most Recent Year: 2015 % Change Median Home Value 256,100 177,500 (31%) Median Contract Rent 699 758 8% Data Source: 2005-2009 ACS (Base Year), 2011-2015 ACS (Most Recent Year) TABLE 30 - RENT PAID Rent Paid Number % Less than $500 13,345 15.5% $500-999 52,045 60.6% $1,000-1,499 17,275 20.1% $1,500-1,999 2,185 2.5% $2,000 or more 1,060 1.2% Total 85,910 100.0% Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Housing Affordability TABLE 31 – HOUSING AFFORDABILITY % Units affordable to Households earning Renter Owner 30% HAMFI 3,980 No Data 50% HAMFI 12,205 4,150 80% HAMFI 47,765 14,445 100% HAMFI No Data 22,165 Total 63,950 40,760 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 86 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Monthly Rent TABLE 32 – MONTHLY RENT Monthly Rent ($) Efficiency (no bedroom) 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom Fair Market Rent 697 771 958 1,368 1,599 High HOME Rent 697 771 929 1,065 1,169 Low HOME Rent 525 562 675 778 868 Data Source: HUD FMR and HOME Rents FIGURE 9: MEDIAN HOME VALUE, CITY OF FRESNO, 2009-2017 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 87 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 10: MEDIAN CONTRACT RENT, CITY OF FRESNO, 2009-2017 Is there sufficient housing for households at all income levels? Table 31 estimates the number of units affordable to renters and owners at a variety of income levels, which can be compared to the number of households at each income level, as provided in Table 6 of the Needs Assessment. According to CHAS estimates, there are 25,190 renter households with incomes under 30 percent HAMFI in the city but only 3,980 rental units affordable at that income level (see Table 31). There are 17,465 renter households with incomes between 30 and 50 percent HAMFI in the city but only 12,205 rental units affordable at that income level. Thus, there is insufficient rental housing for households with very low incomes. There appears to be a sufficient number of renter units affordable to renter households at the other income levels. However, these figures do not take into account unit condition or size; nor do they reflect the possibility that a unit that would be affordable to a low or moderate income household may be unavailable to them because it is occupied by a higher income household. Turning to owners, there are an estimated 11,245 owner households with incomes 50% HAMFI and below in the city, but only 4,150 owner-occupied housing units affordable at that income level (see Table 31). At the next income levels there appear to be adequate affordable units. As with Consolidated Plan FRESNO 88 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) rental housing, these figures do not take into account housing size or condition, or the possibility that higher income households will choose to occupy lower cost units. The National Low Income Housing Coalition’s Out of Reach data examines rental housing rates relative to income levels for counties and metro areas throughout the U.S. To afford a two- bedroom rental unit at the Fresno MSA Fair Market Rent (FMR) of $956 without being cost- burdened would require an annual wage of $38,240. This amount translates to a 40-hour work week at an hourly wage of $18.38, a 61-hour work week at minimum wage, or a 57-hour work week at the MSA’s average renter wage of $12.81. To afford a three-bedroom unit at the FMR of $1,364 would require an annual wage of $54,560. How is affordability of housing likely to change considering changes to home values and/or rents? Median home value decreased by 31 percent from the 2005-2009 ACS to the 2013-2017 ACS, and median rent increased by 8 percent (see Table 29). While home values fell and rents stagnated within the period during the Great Recession, housing values are recovering more quickly in recent years, and rents have surpassed their pre-recession levels (see Figures 9 and 10). Affordability has, in turn, decreased, particularly for renters. A tight rental market, a lack of affordable for-sale housing, and slow wage growth all indicate that housing affordability is likely to continue as an issue in the city. How do HOME rents / Fair Market Rent compare to Area Median Rent? How might this impact your strategy to produce or preserve affordable housing? Table 32 shows HUD Fair Market Rents and HOME rents for the region. The median contract rent of $758 is slightly less than the fair market rent for a 1-bedroom unit. However, many lower- income families with children may require larger units, which are largely unaffordable to those working low-wage jobs. Note that this data does not reflect housing condition, which is an important consideration. While the rent may be affordable, substandard housing conditions may make a unit unsafe or lead to exceptionally high utility costs, negating any savings in rent as compared to a more expensive unit. Discussion Based on 2011‐2015 ACS data provided by HUD, it appears that there is a need for additional housing for those at or below 30% HAMFI. There are only 3,980 rental units identified that meet that need, resulting in a shortage of more than 21,000 units relative to households in this group. This also supports the need for Section 202 and Section 8 developments. There is also a need for owner housing for those at or below 50% HAMFI. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 89 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing – 91.210(a) Introduction This section examines the condition of housing in the city of Fresno, including the presence of selected housing conditions: (1) lack of complete plumbing facilities, (2) lack of complete kitchen facilities, (3) more than one person per room, and (4) cost burden greater than 30%. This section also examines the age of housing stock, vacancy rate and suitability of vacant housing for rehabilitation, and the risk of lead-based paint hazards. Renters in the city of Fresno are more likely than owners to experience one or more of the selected housing conditions. About 63 percent of renter-occupied units and 34 percent of owner-occupied units have at least one of the conditions described above (see Table 33). CHAS data discussed in the Needs Assessment indicates that cost burdens are by far the most common housing condition. About 32 percent of owner-occupied units in the city have one selected condition (24,060 units), and 2 percent have two or more selected conditions (1,680 units). In contrast, 54 percent of renter-occupied units have one condition (46,365 units), and 9 percent have two conditions (7,925 units). These figures indicate that rental units are more likely to be physically substandard (i.e., lack a complete kitchen or plumbing). Less than 1 percent of both renter- and owner-occupied units have three or more conditions (165 renter-occupied units and 45 owner- occupied units). Age of housing reflects periods of development in Fresno. The city contains a significant supply of housing built prior to 1980, of which 37,810 units are owner-occupied (50 percent of owner- occupied units) and 50,135 are rental units (58 percent of rental units) (see Table 34). 50 percent of owner-occupied units and 42 percent of rental units were built in 1980 or later. Renters are more likely than owners to occupy housing built between 1950 and 1979, while owners are more likely to occupy the newest housing, built in 2000 or later. While some older units may be well- maintained, the considerable share of housing built prior to 1980 indicates potential need for rehabilitation assistance. Definitions For the purpose of this Consolidated Plan, the City of Fresno defines units to be in “standard condition” if they meet HUD Section 8 housing quality standards. A unit is defined as “substandard” if it lacks complete plumbing, a complete kitchen, or heating fuel (or uses heating fuel that is wood, kerosene, or coal). A unit is “substandard but suitable for rehabilitation” if it lacks complete plumbing, a complete kitchen or a reliable and safe heating system but has some limited infrastructure that can be improved upon. These units are likely to have deferred maintenance and may have some structural damage such as leaking roofs, deteriorated interior surfaces, and inadequate insulation. They may not be part of public water or sewer systems but have sufficient systems to allow for clean water and adequate waste disposal. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 90 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Condition of Units TABLE 33 - CONDITION OF UNITS Condition of Units Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Number % Number % With one selected Condition 24,060 32% 46,365 54% With two selected Conditions 1,680 2% 7,925 9% With three selected Conditions 30 0% 135 0% With four selected Conditions 15 0% 30 0% No selected Conditions 50,220 66% 31,460 37% Total 76,005 100% 85,915 100% Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Year Unit Built TABLE 34 – YEAR UNIT BUILT Year Unit Built Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Number % Number % 2000 or later 15,000 20% 10,690 12% 1980-1999 23,190 31% 25,095 29% 1950-1979 29,025 38% 38,900 45% Before 1950 8,785 12% 11,235 13% Total 76,000 101% 85,920 99% Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 91 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 11: NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS BUILT BY TIME PERIOD, CITY OF FRESNO Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard TABLE 35 – RISK OF LEAD-BASED PAINT Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Number % Number % Total number of units built before 1980 37,810 50% 50,135 58% Housing units built before 1980 with children present 17,750 23% 7,550 9% Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS (Total Units) 2011-2015 CHAS (Units with Children present) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 92 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Vacant Units TABLE 36 - VACANT UNITS Vacant Units Number Percent For rent 4,178 36.3% For sale 697 6.1% Rented or sold but not occupied 1,611 14.0% For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 687 6.0% Other vacancies 4,337 37.7% Total 11,510 100% Data Source: 2013-2017 ACS Need for Owner and Rental Rehabilitation Community input from local stakeholders and residents indicates substantial need for owner- occupied housing rehabilitation. About 46 percent of survey respondents rated “help for homeowners to make housing improvements” as a high need in the city, and 33 percent rated it as a moderate need. Data regarding housing conditions indicates that 1,725 owner-occupied units (about 2 percent of total owner-occupied units) in the city have at least two housing conditions, which are likely to include cost burdens and one other condition (overcrowding, lack of complete kitchen, or lack of complete plumbing). Additionally, 8,785 owner-occupied housing units (12 percent of total owner-occupied units) in the city were built before 1950, indicating the highest risk for deferred maintenance and rehabilitation need. 29,025 units of owner-occupied housing (38 percent of total owner-occupied units) in the city were built between 1950 and 1980, and as this housing ages, maintenance needs will continue to grow. Owners are less likely to lack complete kitchens or plumbing and therefore are less likely to live in substandard housing. However, housing age indicates that some owner-occupied units are at risk of deferred maintenance and may currently or in the near future be in need of some rehabilitation, given that 37,810 units (50 percent of total owner-occupied units) were built prior to 1980. Additionally, seniors living on Social Security or retirement income who have paid off their mortgages may now be unable to afford necessary repairs and maintenance as their homes age. Results of public participation efforts and data on the city’s housing stock also indicate a high level of need for rehabilitation of rental units. About 55 percent of survey respondents rated “rehabilitation of rental housing” as a high need, and 28 percent rated it as a moderate need. 11,235 rental housing units in the city (13 percent of total rental units) were built before 1950, and 38,900 units were built between 1950 and 1980 (45 percent of total rental units). Further, a greater number of rental units (8,090) than owner units (1,725) have at least two housing conditions, likely including cost burdens and at least one other housing condition. Combined, these factors indicate Consolidated Plan FRESNO 93 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) that while there is a high level of need for rehabilitation of both renter- and owner-occupied housing, renters in Fresno experience the highest levels of need. Estimated Number of Housing Units Occupied by Low or Moderate Income Families with LBP Hazards Exposure to lead-based paint represents one of the most significant environmental threats from a housing perspective. Housing conditions can significantly affect public health, and exposure to lead may cause a range of health problems for adults and children. The major source of lead exposure comes from lead-contaminated dust found in deteriorating buildings, including residential properties built before 1978 that contain lead-based paint. Unfortunately, measuring the exact number of housing units with lead-based paint hazards is difficult. However, risk factors for exposure to lead include housing old enough to have been initially painted with lead-based paint (i.e., pre-1978), households that include young children, and households in poverty. Table 35 identifies the total number of housing units built before 1980 and the total number of renter and owner units built before 1980 that house children under age 6. In the City of Fresno, this includes 17,750 owner-occupied units (23 percent of total owner-occupied housing units) and 7,550 renter-occupied units (9 percent of total renter-occupied housing units) with at least two risk factors for exposure to lead-based paint (built before 1980 and housing young children). Consolidated Plan FRESNO 94 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing – 91.210(b) Introduction The needs of public housing residents and voucher holders are different from those of the city’s overall low- and moderate-income population primarily in that these residents are housed in stable and decent housing. With this need met, residents are able to work on other needs that families typically face in addition to housing insecurity. These other needs frequently include childcare, healthcare, employment, transportation, and food. Totals Number of Units TABLE 37 – TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS BY PROGRAM TYPE Program Type Certificate Mod- Rehab Public Housing Vouchers Total Project - based Tenant - based Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Family Unification Program Disabled* # of units vouchers available 0 0 766 6,853 11 6,842 523 1,803 991 # of accessible units *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 95 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe the supply of public housing developments. Describe the number and physical condition of public housing units in the jurisdiction, including those that are participating in an approved Public Housing Agency Plan: According to HUD PIC data, there are 766 public housing units in the City of Fresno, which are part of 5 traditional public housing sites. The FH reports in its 2020 Annual Plan that it has 506 public housing units. The Fairview Heights Terrace is a 74-unit multi-family development. Pacific Gardens is a 56-unit apartment complex built in 1970; its last major renovation took place in 2011. Parc Grove Commons is a newer complex, built in 2011, which is composed of 215 townhomes and apartments. Yosemite Village contains 69 townhomes first built in 1952. The development has completed four major renovations between 1992 and 2009. Public Housing Condition TABLE 38 - PUBLIC HOUSING CONDITION Public Housing Development Average Inspection Score Pacific Gardens, 5161 E. Kings Canyon Road, Fresno, CA 82 Yosemite Village, 1132 N. Sherman Court, Fresno, CA 77 Yosemite Village - Phase 2, 939 W. California Avenue, Fresno, CA 90 Parc Grove Commons II, 2086 N. Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 89 Fairview Heights Terrace, 640 E. California Avenue, Fresno, CA 83 Fresno Average Score 84 Describe the restoration and revitalization needs of public housing units in the jurisdiction: The FH 2020 Annual Plan states that three of the city’s public housing sites are being considered for disposition and conversion to a different low-income housing type or community facility. These three sites are Pacific Gardens, Yosemite Village – Phase 2, and Fairview Heights Terrace. Seventy-four of the units at Yosemite Village – Phase 2 are also being considered for demolition or disposition to be converted to a Low-Income Housing Tax Credit site. Three sites are also planned for conversion under the RAD program between 2019 and 2021: Yosemite Village (69 units), Parc Grove II (31 units), and Pacific Gardens (22 units). Conversion of these sites under the RAD program may include either demolition, rehabilitation or new construction at these sites. Describe the public housing agency's strategy for improving the living environment of low- and moderate-income families residing in public housing: As part of its on-going efforts to improve resident and staff safety and its properties, the FH conducts several joint projects with partners such as the Fresno Police, Sanger Police and Consolidated Plan FRESNO 96 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) California Highway Patrol to build relationships and provide information on property safety, telephone scams and car seat safety. The FH also trains its staff in de-escalation techniques, emergency protocols and conducts property safety assessments. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 97 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services – 91.210(c) Introduction This section summarizes homeless facilities and services. It was completed with data from the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care, including the 2018 Housing Inventory Count. Facilities and Housing Targeted to Homeless Households Based on a review of emergency, transitional, and permanent supportive housing that serves homeless persons in Fresno and Madera counties, there are an estimated 411 year round emergency shelter beds, about 55 percent of which are individual beds (225 beds) and about 45 percent of which are family beds (186 beds). The counties’ homeless facilities also include 114 transitional housing beds and 1,931 permanent housing beds, including 1,353 permanent supportive housing beds. TABLE 39 - FACILITIES AND HOUSING TARGETED TO HOMELESS HOUSEHOLDS Emergency Shelter Beds Transitional Housing Beds Permanent Supportive Housing Beds Year-Round Beds (Current & New) Voucher / Seasonal / Overflow Beds Current & New Current & New Under Development Households with Adult(s) and Child(ren) 186 0 47 536 Households with Only Adults 215 0 67 817 Chronically Homeless Households N/A 0 N/A 873 Veterans 41 0 44 752 Unaccompanied Youth 26 0 4 0 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 98 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe mainstream services, such as health, mental health, and employment services to the extent those services are used to complement services targeted to homeless persons There are a variety of mainstream services that are used to complement targeted services for homeless persons. The Continuum of Care focuses on supporting coordination and collaboration among these systems so that homeless persons can access mainstream resources to assist them in transitioning to and remaining stable in permanent housing. Examples of health, mental health, and employment services that complement services targeted to homeless persons include: • Workforce Connection (the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board) provides basic career services, career guidance, skill level evaluations, educational and training opportunities, job readiness workshops, training, and supportive services. • The County of Fresno Department of Behavioral Health provides employment services and preparation, job placement, education support, computer lab access, and mental health services. • The County of Fresno Department of Public Health provides specialty care programs, including the Medically Indigent Services Program, which assists qualified low-income Fresno County residents who have a medical need, but have no source of health coverage available and no other way to pay for necessary medical care. • The Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission provides educational programs, including Head Start and ABE/GED programs; employment training for young adults; and financial and social enterprise services. • West Care provides treatment and rehabilitation, veterans services, transitional reentry programs, and crisis psychiatric response services. • Kings View provides mental health services, drugs and alcohol treatment, and youth skills programs. • The Poverello House provides a medical clinic with free health and dental services, substance abuse and rehabilitation treatment, case management services to navigate housing and mental health services, and classes on peer counseling, life skills, agency referrals, health education, and self-esteem. • The Holy Cross Center for Women and Children provides counseling and referral services, education and skills training, clothing distribution, laundry and shower facilities, social activities, and a six-week summer program for children and teens. • Centro La Familia Advocacy Services provides victims assistance programs, parenting and families programs, navigation of mental health support and services, health insurance enrollment, and CalFresh enrollment. • The Marjaree Mason Center provides counseling, crisis support, and domestic violence education and training. List and describe services and facilities that meet the needs of homeless persons, particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth. If the services and facilities are listed on screen SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure or screen Consolidated Plan FRESNO 99 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services, describe how these facilities and services specifically address the needs of these populations. Services and facilities that meet the needs of persons experiencing homelessness include: • MAP (Multi-Agency Access Program) is an integrated intake process that includes screening and service navigation for social and health services, public benefits, housing, and other immediate necessities. MAP is funded by the County of Fresno Department of Behavioral Health. • Multiple organizations in Fresno provide outreach to people experiencing homelessness. For example, the Poverello House provides access to clothing, showers, laundry, healthcare, and food, and the Fresno Rescue Mission provides a mobile community response unit, food services, chapel services, warming and sobering centers, and 24-hour emergency services with case management, and educational programs, including computer learning centers and GED and literacy programs; behavioral health programs; life skills training; and counseling. • Multiple organizations provide emergency and transitional housing for persons experiencing homelessness, including Fresno County, the Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission, the Marjaree Mason Center, Turning Point of Central California, West Care, and Valley Teen Ranch, among others. • Multiple organizations and agencies provide services to support people experiencing homelessness in transitioning to permanent housing, including permanent supportive housing and rapid rehousing services, including the Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission, the Fresno Housing Authority, Turning Point of Central California, and West Care, among others. • Multiple organizations and agencies provide transitional and permanent housing opportunities for veterans and their families, including the VA Central California Health Care System, which provides emergency shelter for veterans; West Care, which provides transitional housing and rapid rehousing for veterans; the Fresno Housing Authority, which provides permanent housing for veterans. • Multiple organizations provide emergency shelter and transitional housing options for unaccompanied youth, including the Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission, which provides emergency shelter for unaccompanied youth, and Valley Teen Ranch, which provides transitional housing for unaccompanied youth. MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services – 91.210(d) Introduction This section describes the housing and social service needs of the region’s special populations including the elderly, frail elderly, domestic violence victims, residents with diagnosis of HIV/AIDS, and residents with substance abuse, mental health, or disability diagnosis. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 100 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Baseline Table TABLE 40– HOPWA ASSISTANCE BASELINE Type of HOWA Assistance Number of Units Designated or Available for People with HIV/AIDS and their families TBRA 16 PH in facilities 0 STRMU 15 ST or TH facilities 0 PH placement 0 Data Source: HOPWA CAPER and HOPWA Beneficiary Verification Worksheet HOPWA Assistance, Including the elderly, frail elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical, developmental), persons with alcohol or other drug addictions, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, public housing residents and any other categories the jurisdiction may specify, and describe their supportive housing needs The Elderly and People with Disabilities The elderly and people with disabilities need housing that provides access to transit or transportation services in order to facilitate access to employment, resources, and services. There is a need for supportive housing in areas close to transit and within short distances to needed resources and services. These needs should be primary considerations in the location of supportive housing for people with disabilities and seniors. Housing should also focus on integrating these populations into the community and reducing social isolation through programming and facilitating access to resources and services. In addition to housing located near transportation and needed services, people with intellectual and developmental disabilities often need case management or life skills programming that does not violate direct service requirements. Persons Living with HIV/AIDS Persons living with HIV/AIDS need low-barrier housing free from requirements such as those surrounding drug testing, sobriety, criminal background, and medical appointments. A ‘housing first’ model in which housing is provided without these kinds of barriers is needed. Similar to other vulnerable populations, persons living with HIV/AIDS need housing that provides easy access to health services, resources, and employment. Persons living with HIV/AIDS may need case management services, although stakeholders interviewed as part of this planning process emphasized that supportive services should not be required for people living with HIV/AIDS to access housing. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 101 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Public Housing Residents Public housing residents may have a need for supportive services such as access to childcare and afterschool programs, transportation to and from these and other services and employment, health services, access to fresh and affordable food, and workforce development and training services. Describe programs for ensuring that persons returning from mental and physical health institutions receive appropriate supportive housing Supportive housing is frequently a need for people with mental health and substance abuse disorders after being discharged from inpatient treatment in order to prevent homelessness. Persons returning from these institutions need access to affordable housing and health services and may also require supportive services such as case management and transportation assistance. Multiple supportive housing providers in Fresno make mental and physical health services available through supportive housing. For example, West Care provides treatment and rehabilitation and crisis psychiatric response services; Kings View provides mental health services and drugs and alcohol treatment; and the Poverello House provides a medical clinic with free health and dental services, substance abuse and rehabilitation treatment, case management services to navigate mental health services, and classes on peer counseling, life skills, agency referrals, health education, and self-esteem. Additional supportive services available in the community are described in section MA-30. Supportive services are also available outside of supportive housing programs. For example, the County of Fresno Department of Behavioral Health provides employment services and preparation, job placement, education support, computer lab access, and mental health services. Local service providers are well-networked and often make referrals to one another to provide shelter, temporary food, clothing, and other immediate services. Persons returning from mental and physical health institutions also need access to housing that is affordable, close to needed health services, and accessible to transportation options. The use of funds such as those provided through the HOME program to support the development of affordable housing that provides access to services and transportation facilitates persons with mental and physical health challenges in accessing needed care and resources and supports the use of in-home services. Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e) with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. 91.315(e) The City of Fresno’s first year Annual Action Plan specifies the activities it plans to support over the 2020 program year to address housing and supportive service needs. These include: Consolidated Plan FRESNO 102 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Housing rehabilitation • Senior paint program • Affordable housing development or rehabilitation • Community Housing Development Organization set-aside • Tenant-based rental assistance • Nonprofit public services • PARCS after school program • PARCS senior hot meals program • Neighborhood street and sidewalk improvements • Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS/HIV • Fair housing • Micro-enterprise assistance For entitlement/consortia grantees: Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e) with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. (91.220(2)) The City of Fresno will address housing and supportive service needs of residents through the development of new affordable rental housing through a Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO), which will meet HUD requirements that any new construction with five or more dwelling units have a minimum of 5 percent of units be accessible to individuals with mobility impairments and an additional 2 percent be accessible to individuals with sensory impairments. The City will also fund a housing rehabilitation program, which may be used by seniors to complete home improvements they could otherwise not afford, thereby allowing them to stay in their homes longer, and/or by people with disabilities who need accessibility modifications to remain in their homes. The City’s HOPWA program will fund rent, mortgage, and utility assistance for homelessness prevention and tenant-based rental assistance. MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing – 91.210(e) Negative Effects of Public Policies on Affordable Housing and Residential Investment In the 2019 report, “Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates,” several researchers writing on behalf of the grassroots organization Faith in the Valley found that evictions were an important factor in overall housing instability. Eviction records also posed a major barrier for many residents seeking to obtain housing, particularly quality affordable housing. The report found that most evictions occurred for various reason, primarily due to late rent. Renters who were one month late with rent or owed one month’s rent plus fees made up 72% of all rent-related evictions. Another 11% of rent-related evictions occurred due to the tenant owing less than one-month’s rent. Other reasons for evictions included domestic disturbances, housing tenants who were not on the lease, owning unauthorized pets, marijuana or other substance use, or without any reason given. Fees associated with court and other potential costs tended to exacerbate the financial hardship for tenants, making the process of finding new housing even Consolidated Plan FRESNO 103 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) more strenuous. Most importantly, evictions remain on an individual’s rental history for 7-years, serving as a major barrier to obtaining quality affordable housing for an extended period of time. The report Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates identified “the inadequate supply of decent quality affordable housing” as a causal factor in evictions, explaining that the smaller supply leads to greater demand for affordable units, and that the impact to evicted tenants is much more severe than the impact to landlords who can quickly fill a vacant unit. Policy solutions proposed in the report include the creation of anti-displacement ordinances and the implementation of initiatives identified in the 2015-2023 Housing Element. Additional anti- displacement ordinances in Fresno would fill important gaps left by the state’s Tenant Protection Act, which provides a cap on rent increases to 5% plus inflation, up to twice per year, for residents in a unit longer than 12 months. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 104 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets – 91.215 (f) Introduction This section outlines the employment, labor force, and educational attainment data which informed the development of priorities and goals in this Plan. Economic Development Market Analysis Business Activity TABLE 41 - BUSINESS ACTIVITY Business by Sector Number of Workers Number of Jobs Share of Workers % Share of Jobs % Jobs less workers % Agriculture, Mining, Oil & Gas Extraction 9,735 2,532 6 1 -5 Arts, Entertainment, Accommodations 19,100 21,409 12 12 0 Construction 8,030 8,592 5 5 0 Education and Health Care Services 35,288 45,380 23 26 3 Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate 7,418 10,736 5 6 1 Information 2,278 3,360 1 2 0 Manufacturing 13,152 13,049 9 7 -1 Other Services 6,305 8,112 4 5 1 Professional, Scientific, Management Services 8,383 10,881 5 6 1 Public Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Retail Trade 19,326 22,191 13 13 0 Transportation and Warehousing 4,913 5,239 3 3 0 Wholesale Trade 7,087 8,438 5 5 0 Total 141,015 159,919 -- -- -- Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS (Workers), 2015 Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (Jobs) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 105 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Labor Force TABLE 42 - LABOR FORCE Total Population in the Civilian Labor Force 231,175 Civilian Employed Population 16 years and over 198,115 Unemployment Rate 14.30 Unemployment Rate for Ages 16-24 29.34 Unemployment Rate for Ages 25-65 9.25 Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS TABLE 43 – OCCUPATIONS BY SECTOR Occupations by Sector Number of People Management, business and financial 35,735 Farming, fisheries and forestry occupations 10,375 Service 23,895 Sales and office 49,750 Construction, extraction, maintenance and repair 22,430 Production, transportation and material moving 11,190 Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Travel Time TABLE 44 - TRAVEL TIME Travel Time Number Percentage < 30 Minutes 144,385 78% 30-59 Minutes 30,795 17% 60 or More Minutes 9,080 5% Total 184,260 100% Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 106 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Education: Educational Attainment by Employment Status (Population 16 and Older) TABLE 45 - EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT BY EMPLOYMENT STATUS Educational Attainment In Labor Force Civilian Employed Unemployed Not in Labor Force Less than high school graduate 29,680 6,195 23,200 High school graduate (includes equivalency) 34,750 6,370 17,130 Some college or Associate's degree 55,140 8,040 18,820 Bachelor's degree or higher 40,275 2,420 6,715 Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Educational Attainment by Age TABLE 46 - EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT BY AGE Age 18–24 yrs 25–34 yrs 35–44 yrs 45–65 yrs 65+ yrs Less than 9th grade 1,330 5,420 7,640 16,405 10,280 9th to 12th grade, no diploma 9,495 10,420 8,275 10,920 4,980 High school graduate, GED, or alternative 15,830 20,315 14,065 23,880 10,760 Some college, no degree 27,385 23,300 14,450 24,805 11,015 Associate's degree 3,505 6,475 4,670 8,425 2,895 Bachelor's degree 3,080 11,245 7,860 14,930 6,855 Graduate or professional degree 175 4,015 3,670 7,710 3,560 Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Educational Attainment – Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months TABLE 47 – MEDIAN EARNINGS IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS Educational Attainment Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Less than high school graduate 17,038 High school graduate (includes equivalency) 24,919 Some college or Associate's degree 30,402 Bachelor's degree 50,006 Graduate or professional degree 66,938 Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 107 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Based on the Business Activity table above, what are the major employment sectors within your jurisdiction? As shown in the Business Activity table above, the employment sectors in Fresno with the largest number of jobs are education and health care services (45,380 jobs or 26 percent of all jobs); retail trade (22,191 jobs or 13 percent); and arts, entertainment, and accommodations (21,409 jobs or 12 percent). The jobs in which the most city residents are employed reflect these major employment sectors. The largest numbers of Fresno residents are employed in education and health care services (35,288 workers or 23 percent of all workers); retail trade (19,326 workers or 13 percent); and arts, entertainment, and accommodations (19,100 workers or 12 percent). The largest mismatch between the share of workers (i.e., employed residents) and the share of jobs by sector is also in agriculture, mining, and oil and gas extraction (5 percentage point difference in the share of workers and the share of jobs). In this way, agriculture, mining, and oil and gas extraction workers make up a much larger proportion of the population in the city of Fresno than do agriculture, mining, and oil and gas extraction jobs of city’s jobs, indicating that these workers live in Fresno but commute outside of the city for employment. Differences between the share of workers and share of jobs by sector are 3 percentage points or less in all other sectors. Describe the workforce and infrastructure needs of the business community: The City of Fresno Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (2015-2020) identifies needs related to workforce and business infrastructure. Workforce development and infrastructure goals identified in the CEDS include: • Upgrade and expand the capacity for skill training and development in Fresno in order to have a workforce that is compatible with current labor demands and commensurate with the economic growth trends of Fresno County and the industrial diversification of the economy that Fresno City and Fresno County are striving to attract to the area. • Stabilize and enhance the business and economic environment of the overall area of the City of Fresno. Activities should be designed and pursued that will help the City attract more industrial diversification and become a greater participant in the regional economic sector while maintaining the viability of the existing retail, commercial and distribution entities. • Provide assistance to existing local businesses, through supporting area revitalization initiatives of existing commercial retail centers, where needed, and improving the access to and availability of capital and credit for local businesses. • Promote labor support programs which enhance the quality of the target area’s labor force and assist them in obtaining new employment opportunities. • Develop collaborative relationships between all private and other government entities within the Central Valley to affect and maintain a comprehensive and coordinated economic development process. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 108 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Additional opportunities identified in the CEDS include: • Expansion of workforce training programs • Expansion of business retention programs • Attraction of large companies • Marketing agriculture as an area strength • Re-Branding the City of Fresno • Encouragement of innovation and entrepreneurship, and • Positive media coverage The Greater Fresno Region DRIVE plan (2019) also identifies workforce and infrastructure needs and opportunities, including: • A world-class “precision food systems” industry cluster that supports advanced, sustainable agricultural production and food manufacturing, focused on cross-disciplinary engineering capabilities in digitalization and data science, mechatronics, equipment, and systems integration • A suite of best-in-class supports for small business owners including a “Fail Fast Incubator” to help validate and support early business concepts, hands-on back-office support and technical assistance to help existing businesses scale, and a flexible pool of capital to directly address the unique capital challenges for small businesses owned by women and people of color • Deploy a patient capital fund and increase economic development capacity to proactively attract and retain the types of jobs and employers needed in the Greater Fresno Region • Develop an innovative, end-to-end talent pipeline and training program for diverse aviation professionals, the strategic framework needed to position the San Joaquin Valley to capture the emerging electric aviation market, and the blueprint for a world-class electric aviation testing lab and innovation hub • A suite of initiatives that meaningfully support the monitoring, re-investment, and distribution of the region’s water to better ensure low-income and vulnerable populations have access to safe, affordable, and clean groundwater while ensuring the Greater Fresno Region has the water resources needed to help agricultural and other businesses thrive • A multi-pronged strategy to reshape the workforce development system, including 1:1 case management for at-risk residents, family support and training funds, and a career network hub for work-based learning • Expand evidence-based programs including high-quality early childcare and education, group prenatal care, nurse and para-professional home visits, and 2-generation coaching to ensure a healthy and equitable start to life • Building the culture and technical infrastructure for longitudinal, cross-agency data sharing, starting with a proof-of-concept pilot for children ages 0-5 and their families • A multi-pronged strategy aimed at increasing the number of bachelor’s degree graduates in Fresno, including growing dual enrollment, providing significant financial support to students for college completion, providing job training and placement support, and creating a regional college pipeline coordinating entity Consolidated Plan FRESNO 109 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • An integrated K-16 collaborative that leverages all regional institutions, increases the educated citizenry in the region, promotes degree attainment through occupation pathways for all learners within prioritized occupations, and meets the region’s economic and labor market needs • A multi-pronged approach aimed at both attraction and retention for teachers, and which includes targeted messaging, financial support, Guided Pathways support, professional development, and exploration of a community schools model • Expand the impact of a world-class medical school to Fresno and the San Joaquin Valley to improve health through training and research • A campaign to counteract “brain drain”, to grow the skilled workforce, and improve Fresno’s human capital value proposition • A suite of innovative, wealth creating tools and programs to support communities of color in Fresno • Innovative, tangible, community-centered solutions that support our downtown economy, transportation, and cultural assets • An 11-mile transit corridor in south and central Fresno that will foster healthier, more prosperous, sustainable, and better-connected neighborhoods through infill and equity- based transit-oriented development • A next generation civic infrastructure that advances authentic place-based, resident- centered strategies to transform power relationships in under-resourced, extreme poverty neighborhoods that lead to healthy sustainable communities • Overcome barriers to equitable, affordable housing by creating, renovating, and ensuring access to over 12,000 quality, affordable units and vouchers by 2030 Community stakeholders also noted the need for workforce training and job search assistance for low- and moderate-income households. 58 percent of survey respondents described employment training as a high need, and 51 percent rated job search assistance as a high need. Describe any major changes that may have an economic impact, such as planned local or regional public or private sector investments or initiatives that have affected or may affect job and business growth opportunities during the planning period. Describe any needs for workforce development, business support or infrastructure these changes may create. Plans for economic and workforce development in Fresno and the region are likely to impact job and business growth over the planning period. For example, the Greater Fresno Region DRIVE plan (2019) proposes a 10-year vision for major changes to economic and workforce development systems in Fresno that have the potential to shape the city and county’s economy over the next 10 years and beyond. The plan calls for more than $4 billion in public, private, and philanthropic investment in economic, development, workforce development, affordable housing, and neighborhood reinvestment by 2030 (see Figure 12 below). If implemented, this vision would increase access to jobs, workforce development, and economic development opportunities for Fresno residents. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 110 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 12: PROPOSED INVESTMENTS IN THE GREATER FRESNO REGION DRIVE PLAN (2019) Socioeconomic changes anticipated over the next several years are also likely to impact workforce needs and job growth opportunities in Fresno. Affordable housing, including housing near job centers, will be an increasingly important component to supporting workforce and business attraction and retention. Stakeholders interviewed as part of this planning process emphasized the need for affordable housing that is close to jobs, resources, and transportation, including a need for a variety of housing types and sizes. This housing is of particular need for seniors, people with disabilities, people transitioning from homelessness, and people living with HIV/AIDS. With increasing demand for housing in the city and region, affordable housing close to jobs, resources, and transportation is becoming more difficult to find, and low-income residents are often unable to access areas of higher opportunity or are displaced by rising housing costs. Rising housing costs are also a primary contributor to high levels of homelessness in the region. To that end, there is a growing need to devote resources to the development of affordable housing with access to jobs, services, and transportation. How do the skills and education of the current workforce correspond to employment opportunities in the jurisdiction? The city’s CEDS and the Greater Fresno Region DRIVE plan both identified the need for skilled labor and knowledge workers in Fresno. The City of Fresno Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (2015-2020) emphasizes the need for workforce enhancement and improving the availability of skills development and work-force training to address low skills in the workforce and low levels of educational attainment. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 111 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The Greater Fresno Region DRIVE plan (2019) describes weaknesses related to education and workforce readiness as including: • Adult Bachelor’s degree completion is almost 30% lower than the state average. These outcomes have implications for the labor market, where the supply of skilled workers often does not meet demand: For occupations that require a certificate or a postsecondary degree, there is a projected labor market gap of ~32,000 jobs by 2033. This gap is defined as the projected shortage of qualified graduates to fill open positions if current historical trends for postsecondary graduates and job openings continue to hold. • In addition to the labor market gap, Fresno faces a higher education capacity gap: Today, ~2,800 students that are eligible to join a 4-year institution are turned away due to the lack of capacity in the region. • For many un- or underemployed adults in Fresno, a lack of educational attainment is a major barrier to achieving more meaningful employment. • Once residents have access to training, they may not receive sufficient work-based learning (WBL) opportunities, resulting in credentials that do not provide employability skills. • Before children are even born, mothers and families of color are disproportionately at risk for adverse early childhood outcomes due to insufficient access to quality care. • Only 34 percent of Fresno children are kindergarten-ready at the time of enrollment. • Insufficient access to programs and services persists after birth and through early childhood, impacting healthy growth and development into adulthood. Describe any current workforce training initiatives, including those supported by Workforce Investment Boards, community colleges and other organizations. Describe how these efforts will support the jurisdiction's Consolidated Plan. The Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board funds education and training to ensure individuals have skills necessary to find jobs with family-sustaining wages and meet the workforce needs of regional employers. Workforce training initiatives include: • One-Stop Centers, in which adults and dislocated workers have access to education, training and employment services, as well as referrals (when deemed appropriate) to other services available through a network of partner agencies • Basic career services, including access to computers, fax and copy machines, telephones to contact employers, veterans’ services, labor market information, career exploration tools, and job listings • Individualized career services, including one-on-one work with an Employment Readiness Specialist to assist with career guidance, skill level evaluations, educational and training opportunities, and job readiness workshops • Access to occupational skills training and on-the-job training opportunities • Supportive services to assist with purchasing items necessary to secure a job, provide training supplies, interview clothing and transportation needs Consolidated Plan FRESNO 112 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Academic assistance, job readiness, mentoring, guidance, financial literacy training, and leadership development opportunities for youth, and • Business assistance, including accommodations for business meetings, presentations, trainings, one-on-one and/or group interviews, business workshops and trainings, connection to business consultants, funding to upskill existing employees, confidential human resource hotline, and recruitment assistance. The County of Fresno Department of Social Services (DSS) offers the following services to qualified employers for DSS clients hired: • Employee recruitment • Employee screening • Specialized employee training • Employee retention services, including support and engagement of clients, equipment, transportation and childcare • Wage subsidies up to a year depending on the needs of the DSS client Local colleges and universities, including California State University, Fresno; Fresno Pacific University; State Center Community College District; West Hills Community College District; Fresno City College; Fresno school districts, and other educational institutions provide a variety of types of education and training to increase the skills of the region’s workforce. The Fresno County Department of Behavioral Health provides Workforce Education and Training as a component of the Mental Health Services Act, intended to address identified occupational shortages and education and training needs of the public mental health workforce. Programs offered by the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board and other workforce development stakeholders closely align with workforce development needs identified in the Consolidated Plan, including job skills training and job search assistance. Does your jurisdiction participate in a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)? If so, what economic development initiatives are you undertaking that may be coordinated with the Consolidated Plan? If not, describe other local/regional plans or initiatives that impact economic growth. The City of Fresno participated in the City of Fresno Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, a plan prepared by the City of Fresno Economic Development Department. The strategy serves as the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) in accordance with the U.S. Economic Development Administration’s requirements, and as a guide for policies, programs, and investments to support economic development in the city. The CEDS identified operational economic development goals for the city, including: • Goal 1: Enhanced Infrastructure Improvement District o a. Complete the fiscal and economic analysis for the Enhanced Infrastructure Improvement District for the Fresno Industrial Triangle. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 113 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) o b. Conclude the engineering work to at least 30% for the Fresno Industrial Triangle public infrastructure. • Goal 2: Build, brand and market the Fresno Industrial Triangle (FIT) as a master planned industrial park of more than 500 acres. • Goal 3: Attract at least one major company distribution center with at least 200 plus employees to build in Fresno. • Goal 4: Receive approval from the Economic Development Administration for the South Van Ness Industrial area improvement application and begin the construction. • Goal 5: Attract the HSRA Heavy Maintenance Facility to Fresno. • Goal 6: Attract at least one Silicon Valley Company to open a major facility in Fresno. • Goal 7: Complete the annexation of 120 acres of land in the sphere of influence into the City for industrial purposes. • Goal 8: Conduct and complete the Brookings Institute GCI export strategic plan and Implement recommendations. • Goal 9: Establish a new and updated Economic Development Website. • Goal 10: Continue and Expand the Fresno business expansion and retention program. Activities the City anticipates undertaking over the next five years will support several of the strategies listed in the CEDS, including providing connections to workforce development programs. The City will continue efforts with the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board to provide job training and employment readiness education. MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion Are there areas where households with multiple housing problems are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration") HUD defines four types of housing problems: (1) cost burden of more than 30%, (2) more than 1 person per room, (3) lack of complete kitchen facilities, and (4) lack of complete plumbing facilities. The HUD-provided map of housing needs and race/ ethnicity in Fresno shows the share of households within each census tract that have least one of these housing problems. A concentration of households with housing needs is defined as a census tract where more than 40% of households have at least one housing need. Using this definition, there are 89 census tracts either totally or partially within the city limits with a concentration of housing problems. Census tracts without high percentages of housing problems can be found primarily north of E. Nees Avenue in northeast Fresno, and north of N. Santa Fe Avenue in northwest Fresno. Several other tracts with low percentages of housing problems can be found in the city, such as the census tracts immediately south of the City of Clovis, two tracts between Peach Avenue and S. Clovis Avenue in southeast Fresno, and a tract north of East McKinley Avenue between N. Fruit Avenue and N. Van Ness Blvd. Census tracts where more than 40% of households have a housing need are generally located in areas of the city that are predominantly populated by Hispanic residents. Although the population Consolidated Plan FRESNO 114 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) of the city is majority Hispanic, the map that follows shows patterns of disproportionate representation of Hispanic residents in census tracts with high percentages of housing problems. Are there any areas in the jurisdiction where racial or ethnic minorities or low- income families are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration") Geographic patterns for people of color residing in Fresno are shown in the maps of people of color by block group in Fresno. Concentration is defined as a census tract in which more than 50% of residents are people of color. Hispanic residents make up more than 50% of the population in many census tracts in central, west and southeast Fresno. Asian residents make up 50% of the population in one census block group in southeast Fresno, between S. Maple and S. Cedar Avenues, south of E Butler Avenue. Black and Native American residents do not make up more than 50% of any census tract in the city. In its fair housing planning guidance, HUD defines racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (RECAP) where more than one-half of the population are people of color and the individual poverty rate is over 40%. There are 40 RECAP census tracts in Fresno, most of which are located in central, southwest and southeast Fresno. Three RECAP tracts are located north of Shaw Avenue; tracts 54.08 and 54.03 include Fresno State University, and RECAP tract 45.05 is located along Highway 41 between Bullard and Shaw Avenues. What are the characteristics of the market in these areas/neighborhoods? RECAP census tracts in Fresno tend to have high percentages of renter tenure. Eighteen of the 40 RECAP tracts have renter rates greater than 74%. Despite a high percentage of renters in the city, the percentage of affordable housing units is very limited. The highest rates of affordable housing units can be found in central and southwest Fresno, where 40-50% of rental units in census tracts 1, 2, 3, and 8 are considered affordable to households earning 50% AMI. Census tract 9.02 in southwest Fresno and census tract 14.08 in southeast Fresno are composed of 67% and 71% affordable units respectively, as recorded in the HUD AFFH Tool. Are there any community assets in these areas/neighborhoods? The RECAP tracts in Fresno contain many of the city’s civic, cultural and educational resources. RECAP tracts in central Fresno, including census tracts 1, 2, 3, 5.02, 6, contain the Community Regional Medical Center, Fresno City Hall, the Fresno Superior Court, and the Fresno Convention and Entertainment Center. Census tracts 54.03 and 54.08 in north Fresno are home to California State University – Fresno and the Bulldog Stadium. Census tract 20 in west Fresno contains the Fresno Chaffee Zoo. Census tracts 34 and 35 hold Fresno City College, the Fresno Art Museum, and the Veteran Affairs Medical Center. Other RECAP tracts are home to many parks, schools and other local amenities for the community. Are there other strategic opportunities in any of these areas? Due to the number of RECAPs in the city, these areas benefit from many strategic opportunities based on location and existing resources. RECAPs located in central Fresno, particularly downtown, are adjacent to Highways 99, 41 and 180. The city’s Downtown Neighborhoods Consolidated Plan FRESNO 115 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Community Plan also note that a number of historic buildings in downtown can be rehabilitated for residential and commercial purposes. The city is also anticipating the construction of a high speed rail line that will run through central Fresno, providing 171 miles of commuter access through the San Joaquin Valley. HOUSING NEEDS AND RACE AND ETHNICITY BY CENSUS TRACT IN FRESNO Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 116 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) POPULATION BY BLOCK GROUP FOR PEOPLE OF COLOR IN FRESNO Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 117 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing occupied by Low- and Moderate-Income Households - 91.210(a)(4), 91.310(a)(2) Describe the need for broadband wiring and connections for households, including low- and moderate-income households and neighborhoods. Broadband wiring and connectivity are critical needs for all households, particularly low- to moderate-income households, who use the internet for both personal and professional use. To that end, uninterrupted broadband service is provided throughout nearly all residential areas of Fresno. Wireline broadband service is offered by both Comcast and AT&T California. Wireless providers are numerous and include Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint, and AT&T Mobility. According to the California Interactive Broadband Map, those locations with access to residential wireline and wireless service typically receive download speeds greater than 10 Mbps and upload speeds greater than 1 Mbps. In the city’s 18 lowest-income census tracts, wireline and wireless broadband service is provided uniformly, and at high speeds. Tracts where wireline coverage are absent on the map tend to be the locations of non-residential uses such as the industrial area south of Highways 41 and 99, the Fresno Chaffee Zoo and Woodward Park in north Fresno. Maps indicate that there is inconsistent wireline and wireless coverage in downtown Fresno and in the area southeast of downtown to S. East Avenue. These areas also have commercial, civic and industrial use as primary land uses. However, there may be residential use present in the downtown area with limited wireless and wireline connectivity. In lieu of services, members of this community may need to utilize wireless services at local community anchor institutions, such as the Central Library. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 118 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Wireless Broadband Coverage in Fresno Data Source: http://www.broadbandmap.ca.gov/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 119 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Wireline Broadband Coverage in Fresno Data Source: http://www.broadbandmap.ca.gov/ Describe the need for increased competition by having more than one broadband Internet service provider serve the jurisdiction. The City of Fresno is largely served by two wireline providers, Comcast and AT&T California. The city is also served by at least four wireless providers: Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint and AT&T Mobility. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 120 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-65 Hazard Mitigation - 91.210(a)(5), 91.310(a)(3) Describe the jurisdiction’s increased natural hazard risks associated with climate change. The impacts of environmental hazards on low- and moderate-income households is an important consideration for regional planners, city staff, and housing and service providers in the city of Fresno and Fresno County. From 2017 to 2018, Fresno County drafted an update to the Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. The plan identified hazards most likely to impact the county. The Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan notes that climate change may have dramatic impacts on the county’s ecosystems, including the following areas of high vulnerability: • Vulnerability to Drought (High) o Reduced snowpack, resulting in earlier snowmelt and reduced downstream water availability during summer and early fall. o Reduced capacity to address future drought and wildfire risk related to climate change due to projected temperature increases and shortages in water. o Greater variation and uncertainty regarding the availability of water supplies, which are already under tremendous stress. • Vulnerability to Wildfire (High) o Overall, warming will lead to increased heat wave intensity but decreased cold wave intensity. Future heat waves signify a potential increase in the wildfire hazard intensity and severity in Fresno County, as well as a year-long fire season. o Fresno County potentially has less capacity to address future wildfire risk related to climate change due to shortages in water, vital to combating wildfires. • Vulnerability to Agricultural Hazards (High) o Changes in weather patterns can have dramatic impacts on the ecosystem, including agriculture systems; more severe impacts can be expected into the future. • Vulnerability to Flood/Levee Failure (High) o Potential for increased flooding because higher temperatures result in increased water vapor to form precipitation. • Vulnerability to Dam Failure (High) o The potential for climate change to affect the likelihood of dam failure is not fully understood at this point in time. More extreme precipitation events as a result of climate change could result in large inflows to reservoirs. However, this could be offset by generally lower reservoir levels if storage water resources become more limited or stretched in the future due to climate change, drought and/or population growth. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 121 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) To mitigate environmental hazards in the county, the plan identifies a variety of techniques focused on protection, prevention, emergency services, coordination, and public education and awareness. Describe the vulnerability to these risks of housing occupied by low- and moderate-income households based on an analysis of data, findings, and methods. The degree to which low- and moderate-income households are vulnerable to increased natural hazards associated with climate change is an important consideration for jurisdictions and regions as they prepare environmental resiliency and other plans. The Fourth National Climate Assessment (2018) notes that vulnerable populations, including lower-income and other marginalized communities, have lower capacity to prepare for and cope with extreme weather and climate-related events. Because these communities are expected to experience greater impacts, it is important that jurisdictions prioritize adaptation actions for the most vulnerable populations.20 The Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan further notes that Fresno County has higher levels of social vulnerability to hazards because of the high proportion of low-income households and households below the poverty level. American Community Survey data for 2013-2017 indicate that: • Median household income for residents of the city of Fresno is $44,853; • An estimated 49,036 (29.7 percent) of the city’s 165,067 households have incomes of less than $25,000 per year; and • 28.4 percent of Fresno residents were living below the poverty level in the past 12 months. In this way, a large proportion of the city’s residents have reduced capacity to prepare for and cope with extreme weather and climate-related events. 20 U.S. Global Change Research Program. (2018). Fourth National Climate Assessment. Retrieved from: https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 122 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) STRATEGIC PLAN SP-05 Overview Strategic Plan Overview This Strategic Plan describes the City’s priorities for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships Act (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) funding, including how those resources will be allocated geographically, how the specific projects funded by the City will address these priorities, and the outcomes that can be expected as a result. The priorities represent the highest level needs expected to be addressed over the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan period using the City’s CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funds. In summary, the priority needs are: • Provide assistance for the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless through safe low-barrier shelter options, housing first collaborations, and associated supportive services. • Improve access to affordable housing for low‐income and special needs households by partnering with interested developers to increase development of low-income and affordable housing in high opportunity areas, and by promoting the preservation and rehabilitation of existing affordable housing units. • Promote quality of life and neighborhood revitalization through improvements to current public infrastructure and facilities, and by closing gaps in areas with aging, lower quality, or nonexistent public infrastructure and facilities. • Provide services to low‐income and special needs households that develop human capital and improve quality of life. • Provide services to residents and housing providers to advance fair housing. • Plan and administer funding for community development, housing, and homelessness activities with improved transparency, increased community involvement, and full compliance with federal regulations. The City of Fresno’s Consolidated Plan preparation coincides with the development of the first year Action Plan process. The City awards CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funding to non‐ profits, public agencies, City departments, and developers that provide public services and housing for low-income and special needs households. It is largely through these partners that the City is able to accomplish progress toward its priority needs. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 123 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-10 Geographic Priorities – 91.215 (a)(1) Geographic Area Not applicable. The City has not established specific target areas to focus the investment of entitlement funds. TABLE 48 - GEOGRAPHIC PRIORITY AREAS Area Name Area Type General Allocation Priorities Describe the basis for allocating investments geographically within the jurisdiction (or within the EMSA for HOPWA) The Consolidated Plan generally allocates CDBG, HOME, and ESG dollars according to low‐and moderate‐income (LMI) census tracts without specification of target areas. The City’s LMI areas include much of south Fresno as well as neighborhoods such as El Dorado Park, Herndon Town, Highway City, Manchester, and Pinedale. HUD generally awards HOPWA funds on a regional basis to the largest city within a HOPWA- eligible region. Fresno therefore receives and administers HOPWA funding for the entirety of Fresno County, known as its “Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area” or EMSA. The City is required to serve eligible persons living anywhere within the EMSA and not just within City limits. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 124 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-25 Priority Needs - 91.215(a)(2) Priority Needs Based on the Needs Assessment, Market Analysis, and community outreach conducted for this Consolidated Plan, the City has set the priority needs described below. To be considered for funding through the City’s CDBG, HOME, ESG, or HOPWA allocations, projects must address one or more of these priority needs. TABLE 49 – PRIORITY NEEDS SUMMARY 1 Priority need Homelessness Priority level High Population(s) served Chronic homelessness Individuals Families with children Mentally ill Chronic substance abuse Veterans Persons with HIV/AIDS Victims of domestic violence Unaccompanied youth Geographic area(s) affected Citywide Associated goal(s) Homelessness Description • Funding for short-term direct assistance in the form of rent and utility payments to prevent households from becoming homeless • Transitional housing options that include supportive services and case management as an intermediate step between emergency shelter and private market housing • Additional shelter space, particularly for intact families and LGBTQ individuals; expansion of capacity for existing low-barrier shelters • Additional and/or improved shelter space for domestic violence victims • Support the use of Housing First and Rapid Re-Housing approaches to homelessness • Outreach to the homeless community to engage and inform people of available services • Permanent housing options for very low-income individuals that can be maintained long term as part of the city’s affordable housing supply Consolidated Plan FRESNO 125 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Priority Need Homelessness (Continued) Basis for priority The 500 respondents to the Fresno Housing and Community Needs Survey ranked the City’s homelessness needs above all other types of needs surveyed, with homeless prevention standing out as the highest-ranked among all the homelessness needs. Survey-takers’ passion for this issue is further underscored by the open-ended comments some included such as: “We just need to do everything we can”, “MOST IMPORTANT!!!”, “Housing First!”, and “This has to be the number one priority for our city.” Additionally, public meeting participants frequently discussed needs related to homelessness. These included needs for more low-barrier shelter space, case management for people experiencing homelessness, job and skills training, drug/alcohol counseling, and shelters for LGBTQ people that are not coupled to requirements for religious participation. 2 Priority need Affordable Housing Priority level High Population(s) served Extremely low income Low income Moderate income Large family Families with children Elderly Public housing residents People with disabilities Geographic area(s) affected Citywide Associated goal(s) Affordable Housing Description • New construction of affordable rental housing units, focusing on infill opportunities with good access to existing public infrastructure • Voucher-based rental assistance (i.e. TBRA) to assist low-income households with the cost of existing rental units in the city • Preservation of the city’s existing affordable housing supply through rehabilitation and repair programs, both for homeowner and rental housing, and to specifically include elderly residents and mobile homes • Programming to assist people with disabilities with the cost of accessibility modifications • Closing cost and down payment assistance to help first-time homebuyers achieve homeownership, including for residents purchasing under an Individual Tax ID Number • Provision of safe, sanitary, and low-barrier housing for people living with HIV/AIDS through voucher- based programs; short-term rent, mortgage, and utility assistance; and permanent supportive housing • Home improvement programming that assists homeowners with the cost of improvements that will improve the energy efficiency of their homes Consolidated Plan FRESNO 126 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Priority Need Affordable Housing (Continued) Basis for priority More than one in three Fresno households (36%) is cost burdened, spending more than 30% of its income on housing expenses; nearly a quarter of the city’s households (22%) spend more than 50%. Cost burdening is particularly pervasive among renters, who make up more 75% of the city’s cost burdened households. Compounding the housing affordability issue is the fact that housing prices have increased far more steeply than household income, meaning that a housing supply that meets all of Fresno’s affordability needs today will be insufficient to do so in the future. Public meeting participants and stakeholders interviewed as part of the development of the Consolidated Plan identified a wide variety of needs related to housing affordability in Fresno. For many, the issue was primarily related to expanding the supply and improving the quality of rental housing. Other needs identified in public meeting breakout groups and ranked highly by survey respondents included energy efficiency improvements, rental assistance, homebuyer assistance, and housing for specific subpopulations (large families, seniors, people with disabilities). 3 Priority need Public Infrastructure and City-Owned Facilities Priority level High Population(s) served Extremely low income Low income Moderate income People with physical disabilities Non-housing community development Geographic area(s) affected Citywide Associated goal(s) Public Infrastructure and Facilities Description • Improvements to streets, curbs, sidewalks, and street lighting, particularly in south Fresno neighborhoods • Renovation and improvement of existing recreation centers, senior centers, and similar facilities • Improved amenities within existing public parks, such as playground equipment and athletic facilities, particularly in south Fresno neighborhoods • Development of youth-oriented recreation facilities • Acquisition of additional park space in south Fresno Basis for priority Public Infrastructure: Other than homelessness-related needs, street, road, and sidewalk improvements were ranked more highly than any other needs queried in the public survey. Public Facilities: In public meetings and through the Community Need Scorecard exercise, meeting participants tended to rank parks, gymnasiums, outdoor recreation space, and youth centers among the highest priorities. The priority is also supported by survey results, where these types of city-owned facilities were given priority just behind street, road, and sidewalk improvements. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 127 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 4 Priority need Community Services Priority level High Population(s) served Extremely low income Low income Moderate income Large families Families with children Elderly / frail elderly People with disabilities Geographic area(s) affected Citywide Associated goal(s) Community Services Description • Counseling and recovery programs for people with alcohol and/or substance abuse disorders • Services to assist the victims of domestic violence • Services to assist children who have been victims of abuse • Afterschool enrichment programs for children to include educational and recreational programming • Enhanced programming for children and youth in existing parks and recreation centers • Affordable childcare and daycare options, particularly for parents engaged in the workforce or who are enrolled in job training programs • Job training to include assistance with job search and interview skills • Educational activities for adults around job skills and employment to improve employment options • Offer incentive programs for entrepreneurs and local businesses that create new jobs • Recreation, nutrition, and social services for seniors Basis for priority Stakeholders and public meeting participants, including groups of seniors and teens, were instrumental in identifying these high-priority community services needs. The Community Need Scorecard exercise used in public meeting settings generally shows these types of needs as lower priority than those related to homelessness and affordable housing, yet many of the activity types included in the description of this priority were nonetheless ranked highly by survey respondents. The top five public services needs ranked by survey respondents included drug abuse and crime prevention, child abuse prevention, afterschool services, employment training, and neighborhood deterioration. These needs were frequently named in public meeting settings as well. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 128 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 5 Priority need Promote Fair Housing Priority level High Population(s) served Extremely low income Low income Moderate income Middle income People with disabilities Victims of domestic violence Geographic area(s) affected Citywide Associated goal(s) Fair Housing Description • Fair housing education services to help residents, community organizations, and housing providers understand fair housing rights and responsibilities • Legal assistance in the prevention of eviction Basis for priority Survey responses reveal a gap in the community’s understanding of fair housing and a need for greater education and enforcement around this subject. While 64% of respondents reported knowing their fair housing rights, fewer than half (45%) knew where to file a complaint of housing discrimination. Further, 20% of respondents (91 individuals) said they had experienced some form of housing discrimination since living in Fresno, with more than four in five of those instances going unreported. Stakeholder interviews further support this priority and particularly indicate wrongful evictions as a fair housing issue to be addressed. 6 Priority need Programmatic Compliance Priority level High Population(s) served All Geographic area(s) affected Citywide Associated goal(s) Programmatic Compliance Description • Program administration and compliance costs related to the planning and execution of community development, housing, and homelessness activities assisted with funds provided under the CDBG, HOME, and ESG, and HOPWA programs. Basis for priority These are necessary administrative costs associated with ensuring effective coordination and delivery of services to Fresno residents. The City of Fresno is committed to ensuring compliance with federal regulations. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 129 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions – 91.215 (b) Influence of Market Conditions TABLE 50 – INFLUENCE OF MARKET CONDITIONS Affordable Housing Type Market Characteristics that will influence the use of funds available for housing type Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) High level of cost burdens among low-income households; waiting lists for assisted housing units; and need for short-term rental assistance for homeless individuals and families transitioning to permanent housing. Currently, TBRA is provided through HUD’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program administered through local housing authorities, with almost 13,000 vouchers in use within the City of Fresno. The City intends to use CDBG or HOME funds for TBRA over the next five years. TBRA for Non-Homeless Special Needs High level of cost burdens among low-income households, including non-homeless special needs populations; waiting lists for assisted housing units for seniors and people with disabilities. The City anticipates using HUD grant funds for TBRA over the next five years. New Unit Production Age and condition of housing; waiting lists at existing assisted housing developments; high occupancy rates and rental rates; sales prices unaffordable to low/moderate income households. The City intends to use HUD grant funding to support new affordable housing development over the next five years. Rehabilitation Age and condition of housing; issues related to substandard housing, especially for low-income renters; need for home repairs for seniors and other homeowners, including lead-based paint remediation. The City intends to use HUD grant funding to support rehabilitation of affordable homeowner and rental housing over the next five years. Acquisition, including preservation Subsidized housing developments anticipated to age out of their affordability period; age, condition, and availability of multifamily properties suitable for acquisition/rehabilitation; vacant/hazardous buildings identified through code enforcement. The City may use HUD grant funds for acquisition and/or preservation of affordable housing over the next five years. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 130 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-35 Anticipated Resources - 91.215(a)(4), 91.220(c)(1,2) Introduction Table 51 shows the City’s anticipated grant funding for the 2020 program year, along with an estimate of anticipated grant funding for the remaining years covered by this Consolidated Plan. The estimates for CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA assume level funding over the five years of the Consolidated Plan period at 100% of the 2019 allocation amounts. Anticipated Resources TABLE 51 - ANTICIPATED RESOURCES Program Source of Funds Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount Available Remainder of ConPlan $ Narrative Description Annual Allocation: $ Program Income: $ Prior Year Resources: $ Total: $ CDBG Public - Federal • Housing Rehabilitation • Senior Paint Program • Economic Development • Housing • Street and Sidewalk Improvements • Public Services • Nonprofit facilities • Park Improvements • Programmatic Compliance • Fair Housing Education and Assistance $7,112,639 $125,000 $12,679 $7,250,318 $28,950,556 Anticipated funding will include Entitlement grant funds, program income, and prior year resources. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 131 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Program Source of Funds Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount Available Remainder of ConPlan $ Narrative Description Annual Allocation: $ Program Income: $ Prior Year Resources: $ Total: $ HOME Public - Federal • Affordable Housing Development or Rehabilitation • CHDO Set Aside • Tenant-Based Rental Assistance • HOME Program Administration $3,255,075 $205,000 $0 $3,460,075 $13,840,299 Anticipated funding will include Entitlement grant funds and program income. ESG Public - Federal • Homeless Management Info System • Homeless Prevention • Outreach/ Emergency Shelter • Rapid Rehousing • Homeless Programs Administration $610,018 N/A $63,212 $673,230 $2,440,072 Anticipated funding will include Entitlement grant funds and prior year resources. HOPWA Public - Federal • STRMU • Short Term or Transitional Housing Facilities • TBRA $636,124 N/A $0 $636,124 $2,544,496 Anticipated funding consists of Entitlement grant funds. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 132 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied Leverage, in the context of entitlement funding, means bringing in other local, state, federal, and private-sector financial resources to maximize the reach and impact of the City’s HUD funded programs. Like many other federal agencies, HUD encourages its grant recipients to strategically leverage additional funds in order to achieve greater results. Leverage is also a way to increase project efficiencies and benefit from economies of scale that often come with combining sources of funding for similar or expanded scopes. In addition to the entitlement dollars listed in Table 51, the federal government has several other funding programs for community development and affordable housing activities. These include: Fair Housing Initiatives Program; Lead Based Paint; Choice Neighborhoods; the Supportive Housing Program; Section 202, Section 811; Youthbuild; the Housing Choice Voucher Program; the Affordable Housing Program (AHP) through the Federal Home Loan Bank, and others. It should be noted that in most cases the City would not be the applicant for these funding sources as many of these programs offer assistance to affordable housing developers and nonprofits rather than local jurisdictions. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 133 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) In California, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) administer a variety of statewide public affordable housing programs that offer assistance to nonprofit affordable housing developers. Examples of HCD’s programs include the Multifamily Housing Program (MHP), Affordable Housing Innovation Fund (AHIF), Building Equity and Growth in Neighborhoods Program (BEGIN), and CalHOME. Many HCD programs have historically been funded by one‐time State bond issuances and, as such, are subject to limited availability of funding. CalHFA offers multiple mortgage loan programs, down payment assistance programs, and funding for the construction, acquisition, and rehabilitation of affordable ownership units. The National Housing Trust Fund (HTF) is a new affordable housing production program that will complement existing federal, state and local efforts to increase and preserve the supply of decent, safe, and sanitary affordable housing for extremely low‐ and very low‐income households, including homeless families.21 States and state‐designated entities are eligible grantees for the HTF. HUD will allocate HTF funds by formula annually. A state must use at least 80 percent of each annual grant for rental housing; up to 10 percent for homeownership; and up to 10 percent for the grantee's reasonable administrative and planning costs. The State also administers the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits program, a widely used financing source for affordable housing projects. As with the other federal grant programs discussed above, the City of Fresno would not apply for these funding sources. Rather, local affordable housing developers could apply for funding through these programs for particular developments in the City. Over the Consolidated Plan cycle, there are several specific sources of additional funding, particularly related to homelessness, already identified and planned for use within the greater Fresno community. These sources include: • HUD funding to the Fresno-Madera Continuum of Care estimated at $10.7 million per year based on 2018 figures (estimate is based on 46% of the CoC’s total award representing the City’s share of the Fresno and Madera County populations); • CalHome funding of $2 million for mobile home rehabilitation; • Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention Program (HHAPP) funding through a one- time state bond issue ($6.15 million for the City of Fresno and $2.95 million for the Fresno- Madera CoC). As a recipient of HOME and ESG funding, the City is required to generate matching funds. For the HOME Program, the City is required to match twenty-five percent of all project expenditures. In recent years, and for PY 2020, HUD has waived the City’s HOME match requirement based on fiscal distress criteria. In PY 2020, the City will continue to seek HOME match funds to contribute to future year match liabilities. Examples of matching funds under the HOME Program include private financing and interest subsidies from homebuyer and residential rehabilitation programs. ESG requires a 100% match of program funds. The City passes this matching requirement on to the service providers receiving ESG funds. ESG providers meet this requirement through the use 21 HUD Exchange. “Housing Trust Fund.” https://www.hudexchange.info/htf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 134 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) of private donations, state grants, and/or volunteer hours. The City may also provide general funds to service providers in order to meet match requirements. If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan The City maintains a list of vacant city-owned real estate parcels that could potentially be used for opportunities arising in connection with needs identified in this plan. The current list consists of 176 parcels. Of those, 150 (approximately 204 total acres) are located south of Shields Avenue and 7 (totaling 18 acres) are within what the City terms “High Opportunity Areas”. City staff are currently assessing the list of vacant parcels against the priorities and objectives of the draft strategic plan and will provide additional information on anticipated use of any of these city-owned properties in the final report. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 135 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure – 91.215(k) Explain the institutional structure through which the jurisdiction will carry out its consolidated plan including private industry, non-profit organizations, and public institutions. Agencies through which the City of Fresno will carry out its consolidated plan are shown in Table 52. In addition to those listed in the table, the City will also rely on a variety of non-profit and private sector housing developers, including Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs), Low Income Housing Tax Credit developers, and others. As of the last program year, the City has three organizations certified as CHDOs, including Community Housing Assistance Program, Self-Help Enterprises, and Visionary Homebuilders of California.22 TABLE 52 - INSTITUTIONAL DELIVERY STRUCTURE Responsible Entity Responsible Entity Type Role Geographic Area Served City of Fresno Government • Economic Development • Homelessness • Non-Homeless Special Needs • Ownership • Rental • Planning • Neighborhood Improvements • Public Facilities • Public Services Jurisdiction Fresno Housing Authority PHA • Public Housing • Ownership • Rental County Fresno Madera Continuum of Care Continuum of Care • Homelessness • Public Services Region Fair Housing Council of Central California Non-profit Organization • Public Services Jurisdiction Fresno County Department of Public Health Government • Health • Public Services • Homelessness • HIV/AIDS County Habitat for Humanity Greater Fresno Area Non-profit Organizations • Ownership Jurisdiction Fresno County Department of Social Services Government • Public Services Jurisdiction Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board Government • Economic Development • Workforce Development Region 22 State of California Department of Housing and Community Development. (2019). Community Housing Development Organization Certification List. Retrieved from: https://www.hcd.ca.gov/grants- funding/active-funding/docs/CHDO-Cert-List-Nov-2019-F.pdf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 136 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Responsible Entity Responsible Entity Type Role Geographic Area Served Fresno County Department of Behavioral Health Government • Mental Health Services • Homelessness County Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission Nonprofit • Economic Development • Workforce Development • Education • Public Services • Housing • Health County Fresno County Economic Development Corporation Government • Economic Development County Fresno Unified School District Government • Education K-12 • Homeless Liaison Jurisdiction Homeless Service Providers (Poverello House, West Care, Fresno Rescue Mission, etc.) Nonprofit • Homelessness • Public Services • Workforce Development Jurisdiction Assessment of Strengths and Gaps in the Institutional Delivery System Based on information included in Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018), strengths of the institutional delivery system include: • Tremendous enthusiasm was expressed about the Multi‑Agency Access Program (MAP) Point’s ability to assess, link, and connect individuals and families to community resources. • FMCoC Coordinated Entry System (CES) provides assessment, triage, and linkage to available permanent and transitional housing resources dedicated to serving homeless families and individuals.23 Based on information in Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018), gaps of the institutional delivery system include: • There is a need to develop a collective impact initiative of influential community leaders who can deploy human or financial resources and keep track of the big picture, including representatives from philanthropy, business, the faith community, affordable housing and homelessness experts, and human services experts. 23 Fresno Housing Authority and City of Fresno. (2018). Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action. Retrieved from: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5bce427bab1a620db3827b91/t/5bcf93320d929728e94bafff/15403 30305802/Street2HomeReport_v8.pdf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 137 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • There is a need to use the impact initiative to engage the entire community in homelessness issues, including partners, elected officials, community leaders, and the public. • There is a need to strengthen data analysis to expand on the FMCoC’s Homelessness Management Information System (HMIS) and the annual Point‑In‑Time (PIT) Count. • There is a need to implement strategies to enhance the Multi-Agency Access Program and Coordinate Entry System to utilize diversion and to ensure the households with the longest histories of homelessness and the greatest vulnerability receive these scarce resources.24 Availability of services targeted to homeless persons and persons with HIV and mainstream services TABLE 53 - HOMELESS PREVENTION SERVICES SUMMARY Homelessness Prevention Services Available in the Community Targeted to Homeless Targeted to People with HIV Homelessness Prevention Services Counseling/Advocacy X X X Legal Assistance X X X Mortgage Assistance X X X Rental Assistance X X X Utilities Assistance X X X Street Outreach Services Law Enforcement X X Mobile Clinics X X X Other Street Outreach Services X X Supportive Services Alcohol & Drug Abuse X X Child Care X X Education X X X Employment and Employment Training X X Healthcare X X X HIV/AIDS X X X Life Skills X X X Mental Health Counseling X X X Transportation X X Other Other 24 Ibid. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 138 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe how the service delivery system (including, but not limited to, the services listed above) meets the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) The City of Fresno partners with the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care and a variety of agencies and organizations to provide services to the homeless. The City of Fresno uses ESG funds for outreach, rapid rehousing, emergency shelter, homelessness prevention, and data collection and analysis. Housing providers and street outreach workers seek to provide outreach and service navigation to persons experiencing homelessness. As described in Section MA-30, housing providers in the city work closely with the Fresno County Department of Behavioral Health and nonprofit organizations to provide mental health services and case management. The City will also continue to provide information and training to service providers on how their staff can assist clients in accessing mainstream benefits. The Fresno Madera Continuum of Care uses a coordinated entry process and the Multi-Agency Action Program (MAP) to standardize the access, assessment, prioritization, and referral procedure for all people across all participating providers. The coordinated entry process includes assessment, navigation and case conferencing, housing referral with choice, and data collection and communication. The system uses a vulnerability index to prioritize the most at-risk individuals. This approach means that individuals and families who are experiencing homelessness or at-risk of homelessness are identified early, screened, and connected with the most appropriate intervention or best match possible that addresses their immediate needs. Describe the strengths and gaps of the service delivery system for special needs population and persons experiencing homelessness, including, but not limited to, the services listed above The City of Fresno works with its partners in the community to collaborate on projects to ensure that individuals and families who are chronically homeless are housed and provided necessary supportive services. The collaborating agencies will coordinate funding and resources to make additional permanent housing beds available for the chronically homeless community. Efforts include increasing outreach to chronically homeless individuals and families, increasing homelessness prevention, increasing permanent supportive housing, and streamlining the assessment and referral process. Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) identifies the following strengths in the service delivery system: • Since 2011 Fresno has made progress with a 60 percent overall reduction in homelessness. • While overall homelessness and unsheltered homelessness is up in 2018 compared to 2017, chronic homelessness is down significantly. The decrease is attributed to intentional Consolidated Plan FRESNO 139 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) strategic and investment decisions to increase the amount of permanent supportive housing and target this resource to this vulnerable and expensive population.25 The primary gaps in the service delivery system for special needs populations are the lack of funding needed to create additional beds and services. There is also a gap in services delivery for difficult-to-place special needs clients. The lack of long-term affordable rental housing in the city and county presents another gap in the service delivery system. Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) identifies the following gaps in the service delivery system: • While chronic homelessness is down considerably, homelessness overall is trending slightly upwards. • The rise of unsheltered homelessness is likely due to the rising cost of rent and the severe lack of affordable rental housing in Fresno County. • Once a person becomes homeless, the housing resources to help them exit homelessness are also very scarce. Current permanent housing options available through the Fresno-Madera Continuum of Care, permanent supportive housing (PSH), and rapid re-housing (RRH) are at capacity. • Chronic homelessness is projected to rise if no additional permanent supportive housing is added. • There is a need to preserve existing affordable housing. • There is a need to align community programs to create a comprehensive crisis response network that provides person‑centered and housing‑focused service. There is particularly a shortage of residential programs that offer safe temporary shelter and services; generally emergency shelter is highly specialized to a narrowly defined population or program model such that for most single adults there is effectively no access to emergency shelter. • There is a need to create new low‑barrier crisis housing options. • There is a need to enhance housing placement options and supports. • There is a need to scale up rapid re‑housing. • There is a need to increase permanent supportive housing. • There is a need to aggressively expand non‑traditional permanent housing options. • There is a need to design and fund a cross‑sector demonstration for people who experience street homelessness and are frequent users.26 25 Fresno Housing Authority and City of Fresno. (2018). Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action. Retrieved from: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5bce427bab1a620db3827b91/t/5bcf93320d929728e94bafff/15403 30305802/Street2HomeReport_v8.pdf 26 Fresno Housing Authority and City of Fresno. (2018). Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action. Retrieved from: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5bce427bab1a620db3827b91/t/5bcf93320d929728e94bafff/15403 30305802/Street2HomeReport_v8.pdf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 140 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Provide a summary of the strategy for overcoming gaps in the institutional structure and service delivery system for carrying out a strategy to address priority needs The City of Fresno will take the following steps to overcome gaps in the institutional delivery structure and service delivery system for persons experiencing homelessness and other special needs populations: • The City will allocate funding for homelessness prevention, outreach/ emergency shelter, Rapid Rehousing, and Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/ AIDS. • The City will continue to fund housing rehabilitation and affordable housing development. • The City will continue to provide funding to Community Housing Development Organizations to support the production of affordable housing in Fresno. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 141 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-45 Goals Summary – 91.215(a)(4) Goals Summary Information TABLE 54 – GOALS SUMMARY Sort Order Goal Name Start Year End Year Category Geographic Area Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator 1 Homelessness and the Prevention of Homelessness 2020 2024 Homeless N/A Homelessness ESG: $2,884,638 HOPWA: $3,085,201 • Tenant-Based Rental Assistance/Rapid Rehousing: 900 households assisted • Homeless Person Overnight Shelter: 2,500 persons assisted • Public service activities for low/moderate-income housing benefit: 180 persons assisted 2 Safe and Affordable Housing 2020 2024 Affordable Housing N/A Affordable Housing CDBG: $6,911,383 HOME: $15,570,337 • Rental Units Constructed / Rehabilitated: 130 household housing units • Homeowner Housing Added / Rehabilitated: 270 household housing units 3 Public Infrastructure and Facilities 2020 2024 Non‐Housing Community Development Non‐ Homeless Special Needs N/A Public Infrastructure and City- Owned Facilities CDBG: $13,850,574 • Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 50,000 persons assisted 4 Community Services 2020 2024 Non‐Housing Community Development Non‐ Homeless Special Needs N/A Community Services CDBG: $5,509,500 • Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 11,300 persons assisted • Micro-enterprise assistance: 200 persons assisted Consolidated Plan FRESNO 142 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Goal Name Start Year End Year Category Geographic Area Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator 5 Fair Housing 2020 2024 Other: Fair Housing N/A Promote Fair Housing CDBG: $250,000 • N/A 6 Compliance 2020 2024 Other: Administration N/A Programmatic Compliance CDBG: $6,987,640 HOME: $1,730,038 ESG: $228,664 HOPWA: $95,419 • N/A Consolidated Plan FRESNO 143 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Goal Descriptions Goal 1: Homelessness and the Prevention of Homelessness Provide assistance for the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless through safe low- barrier shelter options, housing first collaborations, and associated supportive services. Goal 2: Safe and Affordable Housing Improve access to affordable housing for low‐income and special needs households by partnering with interested developers to increase development of low-income and affordable housing in high opportunity areas, and by promoting the preservation and rehabilitation of existing affordable housing units. Goal 3: Public Infrastructure and Facilities Promote quality of life and neighborhood revitalization through improvements to current public infrastructure and facilities, and by closing gaps in areas with aging, lower quality, or nonexistent public infrastructure and facilities. Goal 4: Community Services Provide services to low‐income and special needs households that develop human capital and improve quality of life. Goal 5: Fair Housing Provide services to residents and housing providers to advance fair housing. Goal 6: Compliance Plan and administer funding for community development, housing, and homelessness activities with improved transparency, increased community involvement, and full compliance with federal regulations. Estimate the number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income families to whom the jurisdiction will provide affordable housing as defined by HOME 91.315(b)(2) Using HOME, CDBG, and HOPWA funding sources, the City of Fresno will provide affordable housing to extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income households through: • The development of 130 HOME-assisted housing units, • Assistance to 900 households in accessing affordable housing through tenant-based rental assistance, and • Housing rehabilitation assistance to 220 households. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 144 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement – 91.215(c) Need to Increase the Number of Accessible Units (if Required by a Section 504 Voluntary Compliance Agreement) For affordable housing developments, the requirement is that 5% of the total development units are to be accessible units. Activities to Increase Resident Involvements The FH offers a number of activities for residents to increase their involvement in management and set them on the path to homeownership. As identified in its 2020 Annual PHA Plan, the FH conducts a financial literacy course through its Faith and Finance Program. The housing authority has also partnered with Self Help Enterprises to create a homeownership class and financial literacy workshop for residents with higher incomes. FH partners with Habitat for Humanity to help residents achieve homeownership. Is the public housing agency designated as troubled under 24 CFR part 902? The FH is designated a “Standard Performer” based on its 2012 score report in the Public Housing Assessment System, with a score of 84 on a 100-point scale. Plan to remove the ‘troubled’ designation Not applicable – the Fresno Housing Authority is not designated as “troubled.” SP-55 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.215(h) Barriers to Affordable Housing In the 2019 report, “Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates,” several researchers writing on behalf of the grassroots organization Faith in the Valley found that evictions were an important factor in overall housing instability. Eviction records also posed a major barrier for many residents seeking to obtain housing, particularly quality affordable housing. The report found that most evictions occurred for various reason, primarily due to late rent. Renters who were one month late with rent or owed one month’s rent plus fees made up 72% of all rent-related evictions. Another 11% of rent-related evictions occurred due to the tenant owing less than one-month’s rent. Other reasons for evictions included domestic disturbances, housing tenants who were not on the lease, owning unauthorized pets, marijuana or other substance use, or without any reason given. Fees associated with court and other potential costs tended to exacerbate the financial hardship for tenants, making the process of finding new housing even more strenuous. Most importantly, evictions remain on an individual’s rental history for 7-years, serving as a major barrier to obtaining quality affordable housing for an extended period of time. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 145 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Strategy to Remove or Ameliorate the Barriers to Affordable Housing The report Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates identified “the inadequate supply of decent quality affordable housing” as a causal factor in evictions, explaining that the smaller supply leads to greater demand for affordable units, and that the impact to evicted tenants is much more severe than the impact to landlords who can quickly fill a vacant unit. Policy solutions proposed in the report include the creation of anti-displacement ordinances and the implementation of initiatives identified in the 2015-2023 Housing Element. Additional anti- displacement ordinances in Fresno would fill important gaps left by the state’s Tenant Protection Act, which provides a cap on rent increases to 5% plus inflation, up to twice per year, for residents in a unit longer than 12 months. SP-60 Homelessness Strategy – 91.215(d) Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs The City of Fresno is an active member of the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care. The goals of this strategic plan align with the goals developed as part of the Continuum of Care’s planning and evaluation processes focused on homelessness in Fresno. Recommendations for outreach and engagement from Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) include: • Use HMIS as tool for coordinating street outreach to ensure streamlined and non‑duplicative access to housing and other resources. • Use a hotline to screen and refer individuals to MAP Point for in‑person services or to the coordinated outreach team for follow up with unsheltered persons who need immediate assistance. • Create a mechanism to coordinate street outreach. Encourage all outreach teams to participate in HMIS and the BNL (by name list) processes that are hosted by FMCoC and the Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC). These goals are reflected in the strategic plan goals of this Consolidated Plan. The City funds outreach and related service providers through the Emergency Solutions Grants program. In 2020, the City’s ESG program will receive funds to support street outreach. Addressing the emergency and transitional housing needs of homeless persons Recommendations for addressing emergency and transitional housing needs of persons experiencing homelessness included in Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) include: • Create new low‑barrier crisis housing options, including bridge housing, engagement centers, navigation centers, and safe havens. Specifically, invest in small 24/7 low‑barrier residential programs (30–75 people daily) in diverse locations. • Provide adequate ongoing operating and services funding for the crisis housing option to ensure that the program is high‑quality, effective, and cost‑efficient. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 146 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Choose sites that are convenient to public transportation. Don’t over‑concentrate crisis housing options in one neighborhood. • Consider creative reuse of existing structures, even if only available for a transitional basis (e.g. 2–5 years). These goals are reflected in the strategic plan goals of this Consolidated Plan. The City funds emergency and transitional housing and related service providers through the CDBG and Emergency Solutions Grants program. In 2020, the City’s ESG program will receive funds to support emergency shelter and transitional housing (TBD). Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again. The City of Fresno and the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care support a Housing First model that prioritizes permanent housing and offers case management and other support services. Recommendations for addressing emergency and transitional housing needs of persons experiencing homelessness included in Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) include: • Increase permanent supportive housing o Deploy housing vouchers with services for chronically homeless individuals and families o Preserve affordable housing and set aside a portion of the units for PSH o Build new PSH using Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) and other affordable rental housing development tools • Aggressively expand non‑traditional permanent housing options o Improve and expand independent living—privately owned homes or complexes that provide housing for adults with mental illness and other disabling health conditions o Develop worker dormitories/bunk houses for employed individuals. o Develop shared housing options, including using written agreements to formalize the co‑residence of two or more families within the same housing unit where each family contributes to the household’s finances using their own income or benefits. • Scale up rapid rehousing to connect families and individuals experiencing homelessness to permanent housing through a tailored package of assistance that may include the use of time‑limited financial assistance and targeted supportive services. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 147 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Ensure sufficient investment in housing resources to avoid bottleneck in crisis housing options. These include housing relocation and landlord mitigation funds, rapid re‑housing, permanent supportive housing and other housing options. • Recruit landlords to participate in a centralized listing process by making currently vacant units available to individuals and families in search of housing. • Create a risk mitigation fund to cover costs due to excessive damage done to a unit beyond what the security deposit will pay. Over the next five years, the City will continue to support homeless service providers, funders, and stakeholders who recognize the need to shift focus and resources to long-term, permanent housing in order to end homelessness. The City will fund organizations that provide rapid rehousing, case management, and housing navigation services to assist homeless individuals and families, including those staying in emergency shelter, make the transition to permanent housing and prevent returns to homelessness. In 2020, the City will fund organizations that provide rapid rehousing, case management, and other supportive services for people transitioning from homelessness to permanent housing. The City will also work to increase the availability of affordable housing in Fresno by using CDBG funds for home rehabilitation and to support the development of new affordable rental housing. Help low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low-income individuals and families who are likely to become homeless after being discharged from a publicly funded institution or system of care, or who are receiving assistance from public and private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education or youth needs. Housing and service providers in Fresno work together to prevent homelessness in populations who are vulnerable to or at risk of homelessness. These groups include extremely low-income individuals and families, people discharged from institutions, and those receiving assistance from agencies addressing a variety of needs, such as housing, health, social services, education or youth needs. Recommendations for helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless included in Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) include: • Scale up diversion and make consistent across community. For households that are screened as currently homeless or at imminent risk, a diversion consultation should be offered. These goals are reflected in the strategic plan goals of this Consolidated Plan. The City funds homelessness prevention through Emergency Solutions Grants and HOPWA programs. In 2020, the City’s ESG program will receive funds to support homelessness prevention. The HOPWA program will fund a variety of homelessness prevention programs, including supportive services, housing information and referral services, tenant-based rental assistance, and short-term rent, mortgage, and utility assistance. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 148 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-65 Lead based paint Hazards – 91.215(i) Actions to address LBP hazards and increase access to housing without LBP hazards The City of Fresno follows HUD’s Lead Safe Housing Rule requirements in all of its federally funded affordable housing development activities. The City also participates in community education to increase awareness of the potential danger of children’s exposure to lead; home environmental screenings; public health nurse case management; and monitoring child health providers to ensure lead testing in high risk children through Fresno County’s Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention program. How are the actions listed above related to the extent of lead poisoning and hazards? Following the Lead Safe Housing Rule requirements in federally funded housing activities reduces risk of lead poisoning and hazards. The Lead Safe Housing Rule is designed to reduce hazards relating to lead-based paint in housing, which include irreversible health effects, brain and nervous system damage, reduced intelligence, and learning disabilities. Children, pregnant women, and workers are most at risk of experiencing negative health effects resulting from exposure to lead- based paint hazards. More than 20 million homes built before 1978 contain lead-based paint hazards. For these reasons, it is vital that the City of Fresno reduce lead-based paint hazards in all federally funded housing activities. How are the actions listed above integrated into housing policies and procedures? The City of Fresno integrates Lead Safe Housing Rule requirements into housing policies and procedures by participating in the County’s Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention program, as described above, and following HUD’s Lead Safe Housing Rule requirements in all of the City’s federally-funded affordable housing development activities. SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy – 91.215(j) Jurisdiction Goals, Programs and Policies for reducing the number of Poverty- Level Families According to the 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-year estimates, the city of Fresno’s poverty rate is estimated at 28.4 percent, above the statewide poverty rate of 15.1 percent. The city’s poverty rate has increased slightly since the 2008-2012 5-year estimates, which estimated poverty in the city at 27.5 percent. The City of Fresno General Plan (2015-2023), Street2Home Fresno County (2018), the City of Fresno Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (2015-2020), and other local and regional plans detail goals for reducing poverty in the city of Fresno and the county, including: Consolidated Plan FRESNO 149 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Economic and Workforce Development • Upgrade and expand the capacity for skill training and development in Fresno in order to have a workforce that is compatible with current labor demands and commensurate with the economic growth trends of Fresno County and the industrial diversification of the economy that Fresno City and Fresno County are striving to attract to the area. • Stabilize and enhance the business and economic environment of the overall area of the City of Fresno. Activities should be designed and pursued that will help the City attract more industrial diversification and become a greater participant in the regional economic sector while maintaining the viability of the existing retail, commercial and distribution entities. • Provide assistance to existing local businesses, through supporting area revitalization initiatives of existing commercial retail centers, where needed, and improving the access to and availability of capital and credit for local businesses. • Promote labor support programs which enhance the quality of the target area’s labor force and assist them in obtaining new employment opportunities. Housing and Homelessness • Preserve affordable housing options. • Create new, low-barrier crisis housing options. • Scale up rapid rehousing. • Increase permanent supportive housing. • Aggressively expand non-traditional permanent housing options. • Align community programs to create a comprehensive crisis response network that provides person‑centered and housing‑focused service. • Emphasize the opportunity for a diversity of districts, neighborhoods and housing types. • Provide adequate sites for housing development to accommodate a range of housing by type, size, location, price, and tenure. • Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. • Address, and where possible, remove any potential governmental constraints to housing production and affordability. • Conserve and improve the condition of Fresno’s existing housing stock. • Continue to promote equal housing opportunity in the City’s housing market regardless of age, disability/medical condition, race, sex, marital status, ethnic background, source of income, and other factors. How are the Jurisdiction’s poverty reducing goals, programs, and policies coordinated with this affordable housing plan The affordable housing, workforce development, and homelessness programs detailed in this plan aim to support the achievement of the housing and economic development goals in Fresno. To combat poverty and reduce the number of poverty-level families, the City has devoted resources to public service programs, including supporting individuals and families in poverty Consolidated Plan FRESNO 150 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) through workforce development, job training, and employment referral. Workforce Connection also provides support in all aspects of employment, including basic career services, career guidance, skill level evaluations, educational and training opportunities, job readiness workshops, training, and supportive services. This Plan continues to identify assisting persons living in poverty as a goal for the CDBG program. The City will continue to fund services to assist individuals in obtaining housing, employment, and other needs. In addition to economic development programs, many homelessness programs and homeless service providers also address expanded employment opportunities as an avenue for combating poverty. The Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission, for example, offers vocational training, counseling, and job placement services. Programs aimed at educating youth, young adults, and adults also combat poverty by developing skills that will allow residents to secure better jobs at higher wages. This plan also calls for continued support for case management services that connect individuals with employment opportunities while also supporting individuals in meeting other needs, such as housing and supportive services. SP-80 Monitoring – 91.230 Describe the standards and procedures that the jurisdiction will use to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of the plan and will use to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements Monitoring Plan The City of Fresno has established a monitoring system to ensure that federal regulations, local policies and program guidelines are met. The monitoring system encompasses both entitlement program monitoring and project monitoring. The City of Fresno's Monitoring Plan for the Consolidated Plan and each annual Action Plan was established to meet three primary goals: 1. Ensure that all activities and initiatives funded, in part or in whole, with HUD funds are consistent with the approved Consolidated Plan. 2. Ensure that all projects and or programs funded are implemented by a competent subrecipient and administered in a timely and financially prudent manner; and that all funds expended are in compliance with federal regulations. 3. Ensure that all activities funded are evaluated and monitored regularly, and that performance is assessed and reported. Entitlement Program Monitoring Each entitlement program has specific monitoring requirements such as timely use of funds, commitment requirements, and uniform administrative requirements that must be met. The City of Fresno tracks these activities throughout the fiscal year. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 151 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Project/Activity Monitoring and Administration City of Fresno Staff will determine that the national objective, activity eligibility and appropriate regulatory requirements to monitor the activity/project are established. Monitoring activities include, but are not limited to, compliance with national objectives, labor standards, financial management, and environmental assessments. Staff conducts desk monitoring of drawdown requests quarterly. Site monitoring of financial documents and activities occur at least once during the program year. Agencies that are new to receiving grant funds are monitored more frequently, generally two to three times during the program year. Site visits of the activity/project funded are conducted once a year. However, rehabilitation and construction projects are monitored by Project Managers, Housing Specialists and a labor standards review throughout the construction period and the affordability terms. Minority Business Outreach (MBE/WBE) The City of Fresno has established a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (MBE) Program in accordance with the regulations of the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City of Fresno in the past has received federal financial assistance from HUD and as a condition of receiving this future/ongoing assistance, the City of Fresno has signed an assurance that it will comply with 24 CFR Subtitle A, Part 85, Subpart C, §85.36. It is the policy and commitment of the City of Fresno to ensure that MBEs as defined in part 24, have an equal opportunity to receive and participate in HUD‐assisted contracts. It is also our policy: 1. To ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of HUD‐assisted contracts; 2. To create a level playing field on which MBEs can compete fairly for contracts and subcontracts relating to construction, professional services, supplies, equipment, materials and other services for HUD‐assisted contracts; 3. To ensure that the MBE Program is narrowly tailored in accordance with applicable law; 4. To ensure that only firms that meet 24 CFR Subtitle A, Part 85, Subpart C, §85.36 eligibility standards are permitted to participate as MBEs; 5. To help remove barriers to the participation of MBEs in HUD‐assisted contracts; 6. To assist the development of firms that can compete successfully in the marketplace outside the MBE Program; and 7. To outreach to local firms and encourage certification and participation in the MBE Program. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 152 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) EXPECTED RESOURCES AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.220(c)(1,2) Introduction Table 55 shows the City’s anticipated grant funding for the 2020 program year, along with an estimate of anticipated grant funding for the remaining years covered by this Consolidated Plan. The estimates for CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA assume level funding over the five years of the Consolidated Plan period at 100% of the 2020 allocation amounts. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 153 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Anticipated Resources TABLE 55 - EXPECTED RESOURCES – PRIORITY TABLE Program Source of Funds Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount Available Remainder of ConPlan $ Narrative Description Annual Allocation: $ Program Income: $ Prior Year Resources: $ Total: $ CDBG Public - Federal • Housing Rehabilitation • Senior Paint Program • Economic Development • Housing • Street and Sidewalk Improvements • Public Services • Nonprofit facilities • Park Improvements • Programmatic Compliance • Fair Housing Education and Assistance $7,112,639 $125,000 $12,679 $7,250,318 $28,950,556 Anticipated funding will include Entitlement grant funds, program income, and prior year resources. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 154 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Program Source of Funds Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount Available Remainder of ConPlan $ Narrative Description Annual Allocation: $ Program Income: $ Prior Year Resources: $ Total: $ HOME Public - Federal • Affordable Housing Development or Rehabilitation • CHDO Set Aside • Tenant-Based Rental Assistance • HOME Program Administration $3,255,075 $205,000 $0 $3,460,075 $13,840,299 Anticipated funding will include Entitlement grant funds and program income. ESG Public - Federal • Homeless Management Info System • Homeless Prevention • Outreach/ Emergency Shelter • Rapid Rehousing • Homeless Programs Administration $610,018 N/A $63,212 $673,230 $2,440,072 Anticipated funding will include Entitlement grant funds and prior year resources. HOPWA Public - Federal • STRMU • Short Term or Transitional Housing Facilities • TBRA $636,124 N/A $0 $636,124 $2,544,496 Anticipated funding consists of Entitlement grant funds. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 155 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied Leverage, in the context of entitlement funding, means bringing in other local, state, federal, and private-sector financial resources to maximize the reach and impact of the City’s HUD funded programs. Like many other federal agencies, HUD encourages its grant recipients to strategically leverage additional funds in order to achieve greater results. Leverage is also a way to increase project efficiencies and benefit from economies of scale that often come with combining sources of funding for similar or expanded scopes. In addition to the entitlement dollars listed in Table 55, the federal government has several other funding programs for community development and affordable housing activities. These include: Fair Housing Initiatives Program; Lead Based Paint; Choice Neighborhoods; the Supportive Housing Program; Section 202, Section 811; Youthbuild; the Housing Choice Voucher Program; the Affordable Housing Program (AHP) through the Federal Home Loan Bank, and others. It should be noted that in most cases the City would not be the applicant for these funding sources as many of these programs offer assistance to affordable housing developers and nonprofits rather than local jurisdictions. In California, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) administer a variety of statewide public affordable housing programs that offer assistance to nonprofit affordable housing developers. Examples of HCD’s programs include the Multifamily Housing Program (MHP), Affordable Housing Innovation Fund (AHIF), Building Equity and Growth in Neighborhoods Program (BEGIN), and CalHOME. Many HCD programs have historically been funded by one‐time State bond issuances and, as such, are subject to limited availability of funding. CalHFA offers multiple mortgage loan programs, down payment assistance programs, and funding for the construction, acquisition, and rehabilitation of affordable ownership units. The National Housing Trust Fund (HTF) is a new affordable housing production program that will complement existing federal, state and local efforts to increase and preserve the supply of decent, safe, and sanitary affordable housing for extremely low‐ and very low‐income households, including homeless families.27 States and state‐designated entities are eligible grantees for the HTF. HUD will allocate HTF funds by formula annually. A state must use at least 80 percent of each annual grant for rental housing; up to 10 percent for homeownership; and up to 10 percent for the grantee's reasonable administrative and planning costs. The State also administers the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits program, a widely used financing source for affordable housing projects. As with the other federal grant programs discussed above, the City of Fresno would not apply for these funding sources. Rather, local affordable housing developers could apply for funding through these programs for particular developments in the City. 27 HUD Exchange. “Housing Trust Fund.” https://www.hudexchange.info/htf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 156 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Over the Consolidated Plan cycle, there are several specific sources of additional funding, particularly related to homelessness, already identified and planned for use within the greater Fresno community. These sources include: • HUD funding to the Fresno-Madera Continuum of Care estimated at $10.7 million per year based on 2018 figures (estimate is based on 46% of the CoC’s total award representing the City’s share of the Fresno and Madera County populations); • CalHome funding of $2 million for mobile home rehabilitation; • Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention Program (HHAPP) funding through a one- time state bond issue ($6.15 million for the City of Fresno and $2.95 million for the Fresno- Madera CoC). As a recipient of HOME and ESG funding, the City is required to generate matching funds. For the HOME Program, the City is required to match twenty-five percent of all project expenditures. In recent years, and for PY 2020, HUD has waived the City’s HOME match requirement based on fiscal distress criteria. In PY 2020, the City will continue to seek HOME match funds to contribute to future year match liabilities. Examples of matching funds under the HOME Program include private financing and interest subsidies from homebuyer and residential rehabilitation programs. ESG requires a 100% match of program funds. The City passes this matching requirement on to the service providers receiving ESG funds. ESG providers meet this requirement through the use of private donations, state grants, and/or volunteer hours. The City may also provide general funds to service providers in order to meet match requirements. If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan The City maintains a list of vacant city-owned real estate parcels that could potentially be used for opportunities arising in connection with needs identified in this plan. The current list consists of 176 parcels. Of those, 150 (approximately 204 total acres) are located south of Shields Avenue and 7 (totaling 18 acres) are within what the City terms “High Opportunity Areas”. City staff are currently assessing the list of vacant parcels against the priorities and objectives of the draft strategic plan and will provide additional information on anticipated use of any of these city-owned properties in the final report. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 157 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) ANNUAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives Goals Summary Information TABLE 56 – GOALS SUMMARY Sort Order Goal Name Start Year End Year Category Geographic Area Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator 1 Homelessness and the Prevention of Homelessness 2020 2024 Homeless Citywide Homelessness ESG: $627,571 HOPWA: $617,040 • Tenant-Based Rental Assistance/Rapid Rehousing: 180 households assisted • Homeless Person Overnight Shelter: 500 persons assisted • Public service activities for low/moderate-income housing benefit: 36 persons assisted 2 Safe and Affordable Housing 2020 2024 Affordable Housing Citywide Affordable Housing CDBG: $1,378,408 HOME: $3,114,068 • Rental Units Constructed / Rehabilitated: 26 household housing units • Homeowner Housing Added / Rehabilitated: 54 household housing units 3 Public Infrastructure and Facilities 2020 2024 Non‐Housing Community Development Non‐ Homeless Special Needs Citywide Public Infrastructure and City- Owned Facilities CDBG: $3,095,105 • Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 10,000 persons assisted Consolidated Plan FRESNO 158 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Goal Name Start Year End Year Category Geographic Area Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator 4 Community Services 2020 2024 Non‐Housing Community Development Non‐ Homeless Special Needs Citywide Community Services CDBG: $1,101,900 • Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 2,260 • Micro-enterprise assistance: 40 persons assisted 5 Fair Housing 2020 2024 Other: Fair Housing Citywide Promote Fair Housing CDBG: $50,000 • N/A 6 Compliance 2020 2024 Other: Administration Citywide Programmatic Compliance CDBG: $1,397,529 HOME: $346,008 ESG: $45,659 HOPWA: $19,084 • N/A Consolidated Plan FRESNO 159 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Goal Descriptions Goal 1: Homelessness and the Prevention of Homelessness Provide assistance for the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless through safe low- barrier shelter options, housing first collaborations, and associated supportive services. Goal 2: Safe and Affordable Housing Improve access to affordable housing for low‐income and special needs households by partnering with interested developers to increase development of low-income and affordable housing in high opportunity areas, and by promoting the preservation and rehabilitation of existing affordable housing units. Goal 3: Public Infrastructure and Facilities Promote quality of life and neighborhood revitalization through improvements to current public infrastructure and facilities, and by closing gaps in areas with aging, lower quality, or nonexistent public infrastructure and facilities. Goal 4: Community Services Provide services to low‐income and special needs households that develop human capital and improve quality of life. Goal 5: Fair Housing Provide services to residents and housing providers to advance fair housing. Goal 6: Compliance Plan and administer funding for community development, housing, and homelessness activities with improved transparency, increased community involvement, and full compliance with federal regulations. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 160 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) PROJECTS AP-35 Projects – 91.220(d) Introduction The City of Fresno expects to implement activities under 18 different projects over the 2020 program year toward addressing priority needs. These projects include rehabilitation and development of affordable housing; the delivery of services to residents, particularly to students and seniors; assistance to people experiencing homelessness; support to households in danger of becoming homeless; improvements to parks, sidewalks, and other public facilities; and funding for fair housing activities. These projects are identified in the table below, with additional detail provided in AP-38. Projects TABLE 57 – PROJECT INFORMATION # Project Name 1 Housing Rehabilitation 2 Housing Rehabilitation Program Delivery 3 Senior Paint Program 4 Affordable Housing Development or Rehabilitation 5 Community Housing Development Organization Set-Aside 6 Tenant-Based Rental Assistance 7 Non-Profit Public Services 8 PARCS After School Program 9 PARCS Senior Hot Meals Program 10 Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) 11 Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS 12 Neighborhood Street and Sidewalk Improvements 13 CDBG Program Administration and Planning 14 HOME Program Administration 15 Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS Program Administration 16 Fair Housing 17 Section 108 Repayment 18 Micro-Enterprise Assistance Consolidated Plan FRESNO 161 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs The City’s allocation priorities reflect its focus on highest-priority needs identified through data analysis, extensive community engagement, public survey results, consultation with stakeholders, and reviews of other plans and studies developed for Fresno and its region. The key strategic priorities that emerged from the Consolidated Plan process and that these projects are designed to address are listed below: Homelessness The 500 respondents to the Fresno Housing and Community Needs Survey ranked the City’s homelessness needs above all other types of needs surveyed. Additionally, public meeting participants frequently discussed needs related to homelessness. These included needs for more low-barrier shelter space, case management for people experiencing homelessness, job and skills training, drug/alcohol counseling, and shelters for LGBTQ people that are not coupled to requirements for religious participation. Affordable Housing More than one in three Fresno households (36%) is cost burdened, spending more than 30% of its income on housing expenses; nearly a quarter of the city’s households (22%) spend more than 50%. Cost burdening is particularly pervasive among renters, who make up more 75% of the city’s cost burdened households. Compounding the housing affordability issue is the fact that housing prices have increased far more steeply than household income, meaning that a housing supply that meets all of Fresno’s affordability needs today will be insufficient to do so in the future. Public meeting participants and stakeholders interviewed as part of the development of the Consolidated Plan identified a wide variety of needs related to housing affordability in Fresno. For many, the issue was primarily related to expanding the supply and improving the quality of rental housing. Other needs identified in public meeting breakout groups and ranked highly by survey respondents included energy efficiency improvements, rental assistance, homebuyer assistance, and housing for specific subpopulations (large families, seniors, people with disabilities). Public Infrastructure Other than homelessness-related needs, street, road, and sidewalk improvements were ranked more highly than any other needs queried in the public survey. Public Facilities In public meetings and through the Community Need Scorecard exercise, meeting participants tended to rank parks, gymnasiums, outdoor recreation space, and youth centers among the highest priorities. The priority is also supported by survey results, where these types of city-owned facilities were given priority just behind street, road, and sidewalk improvements. Community Services Stakeholders and public meeting participants, including groups of seniors and teens, were instrumental in identifying these high-priority community services needs. The Community Need Scorecard exercise used in public meeting settings generally shows these types of needs as lower priority than those related to homelessness and affordable housing, yet many of the activity types included in the description of this priority were nonetheless ranked highly by survey respondents. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 162 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The top five public services needs ranked by survey respondents included drug abuse and crime prevention, child abuse prevention, afterschool services, employment training, and neighborhood deterioration. These needs were frequently named in public meeting settings as well. Fair Housing Survey responses reveal a gap in the community’s understanding of fair housing and a need for greater education and enforcement around this subject. While 64% of respondents reported knowing their fair housing rights, fewer than half (45%) knew where to file a complaint of housing discrimination. Further, 20% of respondents (91 individuals) said they had experienced some form of housing discrimination since living in Fresno, with more than four in five of those instances going unreported. Stakeholder interviews further support this priority and particularly indicate wrongful evictions as a fair housing issue to be addressed. Programmatic Compliance These are necessary administrative costs associated with ensuring effective coordination and delivery of services to Fresno residents. The City of Fresno is committed to ensuring compliance with federal regulations. The City does not anticipate any obstacles to completing the projects it has identified for the 2020 program year. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 163 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-38 Project Summary Project Summary Information 1 Project Name Housing Rehabilitation Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Safe and Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding CDBG: $1,028,408 Description Address the home repair, building systems, and housing rehabilitation needs of low-income homeowners. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 39 low-income units Location Description Available to income eligible homeowners throughout the City. Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 164 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 2 Project Name Housing Rehabilitation Program Delivery Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Safe and Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding CDBG: $200,000 Description CDBG funds will pay for the delivery costs associated with housing rehabilitation targeted to income-eligible households Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity N/A Location Description 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065, Fresno CA 93721 Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 165 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 3 Project Name Senior Paint Program Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Safe and Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding CDBG: $150,000 Description CDBG funds will pay for a licensed lead-certified painting contractor to paint the exterior of the home and may include minor repairs, (i.e., screens, broken window panes, loose or damaged gutters, etc.) provided there are enough funds available after deducting the cost of the paint project. This program serves low-income seniors (62 years of age or older) who own and occupy their homes. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 15 low mod income senior households Location Description 2600 Fresno Street, Room 2065, Fresno CA 93721 Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 166 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 4 Project Name Affordable Housing Development or Rehabilitation Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Safe and Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding HOME: $1,914,018 Description HOME funds will be loaned to local affordable housing developers to finance the development or rehabilitation of rental housing projects affordable to low-income households Target Date 06/30/2023 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 24 new housing units Location Description TBD Planned Activities Development/Rehabilitation of Rental Housing Consolidated Plan FRESNO 167 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 5 Project Name Community Housing Development Organization Set-Aside Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Safe and Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding HOME: $488,261 Description HOME funds will be loaned to a qualified Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) to finance the development of housing affordable to low-income households. Developments may be either rental or homebuyer. Target Date 06/30/2023 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 2 new single-family housing units Location Description TBD Planned Activities Rental Housing Development or Homebuyer Housing Development Consolidated Plan FRESNO 168 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 6 Project Name Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Safe and Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding HOME: $711,789 Description HOME funds will be used to subsidize private market units for homeless and low-income households to increase affordability. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 65 low-income households Location Description Citywide Planned Activities Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Consolidated Plan FRESNO 169 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 7 Project Name Non-Profit Public Services Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Community Services Needs Addressed Community Services Funding CDBG: $161,000 Description CDBG funds will be provided to local non-profits to support programs that serve predominantly low and moderate income clientele. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 560 persons Location Description TBD Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 170 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 8 Project Name PARCS After School Program Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Community Services Needs Addressed Community Services Funding CDBG: $718,100 Description Programs after school on weekdays and Saturday programming for targeted neighborhood community centers to provide enrichment activities, homework assistance, career development, socialization, crime & drug prevention, and meal supplements for low and very low-income youth Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 700 youth Location Description Various community centers in low/mod income areas 1. Dickey Youth Development Center 2. Einstein Neighborhood Center 3. Fink White Neighborhood Center 4. Frank H. Ball Neighborhood Center 5. Holmes Neighborhood Center 6. Lafayette Neighborhood Center 7. Maxie L Parks Community Center 8. Quigley Neighborhood Center 9. Romain Community Center 10. Ted C. Wills Community Center Planned Activities 05D: Youth Services – 24 CFR 570.201(e) LMC: Limited Clientele – 24 CFR 570.208(a)(2) using Nature/Location Presumption Consolidated Plan FRESNO 171 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 9 Project Name PARCS Senior Hot Meal Program Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Community Services Needs Addressed Community Services Funding CDBG: $187,800 Description Weekday enrichment programming for limited clientele in targeted neighborhood community centers; compliments senior meal activity. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 1,000 seniors Location Description Various locations include: 1. Lafayette Neighborhood Center 2. Mary Ella Brown Community Center 3. Mosqueda Community Center 4. Pinedale Community Center 5. Senior Citizens Village 6. Ted C. Wills Community Center 7. Inspiration Park Planned Activities 05C: Senior Services – 24 CFR 570.201(e) LMC: Limited Clientele – 24 CFR 570.208(a)(2) – Presumed Benefit Consolidated Plan FRESNO 172 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 10 Project Name Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Homelessness and the Prevention of Homelessness Needs Addressed Homelessness Funding ESG: $673,230 Description ESG funds will be used to provide homeless prevention services, shelter assistance to homeless and persons at risk of homelessness, to provide rapid rehousing services to homeless and persons at risk of homelessness, and to administer the grant program. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 10 Units of homeless prevention 480 persons provided overnight shelter 95 units of rapid rehousing Location Description TBD Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 173 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 11 Project Name Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Homelessness and the Prevention of Homelessness Needs Addressed Homelessness Funding HOPWA: $617,040 Description HOPWA funds will be used to provide housing assistance and housing-related supportive services for persons living with AIDS/HIV and their families. HOPWA funds will be used for supportive services, housing information and referral services, tenant-based rental assistance, short-term rent, mortgage, and utility assistance. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 66 persons (20 persons/households assisted with TBRA, 20 persons with housing in a short-term facility, and 26 persons/households with STRMU Location Description TBD Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 174 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 12 Project Name Neighborhood Street and Sidewalk Improvements Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Public Infrastructure and Facilities Needs Addressed Public Infrastructure and City-Owned Facilities Funding CDBG: $3,095,105 Description 1. Yosemite Middle School Complete Streets (year one of multi-year project) 2. Highway City Neighborhood Street Reconstruction (year one of multi-year project) 3. West Fresno Elementary & MLK Neighborhood Street Improvements (year one of multi-year project) 4. Burroughs Elementary Neighborhood Street Reconstruction 5. Ericson Elementary Neighborhood Street Reconstruction (year one of multi-year project) Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 10,000 persons residing in selected residential service areas Location Description Proposed areas are listed in the description section Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 175 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 13 Project Name CDBG Program Administration and Planning Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Compliance Needs Addressed Programmatic Compliance Funding CDBG: $1,397,529 Description Grant Monitoring and Administration, Historic Preservation, Environmental Assessments Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity N/A Location Description 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno CA 93721 Planned Activities Objective not applicable 21A: General Administration – 24 CFR 570.206 NA: National Consolidated Plan FRESNO 176 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 14 Project Name HOME Program Administration Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Compliance Needs Addressed Programmatic Compliance Funding HOME: $346,008 Description Grant Monitoring and Administration Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity Not applicable Location Description 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno CA 93721 Planned Activities General Administration and Oversight of the Program and HOME-Funded Projects Consolidated Plan FRESNO 177 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 15 Project Name Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS Program Administration Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Compliance Needs Addressed Programmatic Compliance Funding HOPWA: $19,084 Description HOPWA funds will be used for administrative and compliance oversight activities associated with HOPWA funded projects. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity Not applicable Location Description 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno CA 93721 Planned Activities Grant administration and oversight Consolidated Plan FRESNO 178 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 16 Project Name Fair Housing Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Fair Housing Needs Addressed Promote Fair Housing Funding CDBG: $50,000 Description CDBG funds will be used to support fair housing outreach and education to ensure fair housing opportunities Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity TBD Location Description TBD Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 179 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 17 Project Name Section 108 Loan Repayment Target Area Citywide Goals Supported N/A Needs Addressed N/A Funding CDBG: $227,376 Description CDBG funds will be used to pay Section 108 debt service Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity TBD Location Description 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno CA Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 180 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 18 Project Name Micro-Enterprise Assistance Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Community Services Needs Addressed Community Services Funding CDBG: $35,000 Description TBD Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 40 persons assisted Location Description TBD Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 181 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-50 Geographic Distribution – 91.220(f) Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low- income and minority concentration) where assistance will be directed The Consolidated Plan generally allocates CDBG, HOME, and ESG dollars according to low‐and moderate‐income (LMI) census tracts without specification of target areas. The City’s LMI areas include much of south Fresno as well as neighborhoods such as El Dorado Park, Herndon Town, Highway City, Manchester, and Pinedale. Geographic Distribution Not applicable. The City has not established specific target areas to focus the investment of entitlement funds. TABLE 58 - GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION Target Area Percentage of Funds Rationale for the priorities for allocating investments geographically The Consolidated Plan does not formally identify any specific target areas, however input from stakeholders and members of the public has strongly suggested a particular need for investment in south Fresno communities. Southwest and southeast Fresno were frequently described as having the greatest need for public infrastructure and improvements (such as sidewalks and park space) as well as for programs and services to strengthen human capital (such as job training and afterschool programming). The City will spread resources throughout the City, with the understanding that most funding will go toward the improvement of predominantly low- and moderate-income residential areas to include south Fresno. HUD generally awards HOPWA funds on a regional basis to the largest city within a HOPWA-eligible region. Fresno therefore receives and administers HOPWA funding for the entirety of Fresno County, known as its “Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area” or EMSA. The City is required to serve eligible persons living anywhere within the EMSA and not just within City limits. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 182 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AFFORDABLE HOUSING AP-55 Affordable Housing – 91.220(g) Introduction Although entitlement dollars are limited, the City does anticipate expending a significant portion of its federal allocation dollars on the preservation and provision of affordable housing. Over the 2020 program year, the City of Fresno estimates that it will support a total of 260 low- and moderate- income households through rental assistance and the construction and rehabilitation of affordable housing units. Of these 260 households, 180 are expected to be experiencing homelessness and assisted with a tenant-based housing voucher. Of the remaining 80 households 26 are expected to be able to access newly constructed affordable housing and 54 will have their homes rehabilitated. TABLE 59 - ONE YEAR GOALS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY SUPPORT REQUIREMENT One Year Goals for the Number of Households to be Supported Homeless 180 Non-Homeless 80 Special-Needs 0 Total 260 TABLE 60 - ONE YEAR GOALS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY SUPPORT TYPE One Year Goals for the Number of Households Supported Through Rental Assistance 180 The Production of New Units 26 Rehab of Existing Units 54 Acquisition of Existing Units 0 Total 260 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 183 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-60 Public Housing – 91.220(h) Introduction Fresno residents are served by the Housing Authority of the City of Fresno (FH). HUD PIC data reports that there are 651 units of conventional public housing and another 98 units designated for elderly and/or disabled households through the Section 202 and 811 programs. The FH 2020 Annual PHA Plan identifies 506 traditional public housing units, many of which will undergo demolition, disposition, or conversion to RAD in coming years. Actions planned during the next year to address the needs to public housing The FH is continually planning for and working toward improvements to its housing and communities in order to provide its residents with quality housing options. In it’s 2020 Annual Plan, the FH contemplates several mixed-finance developments that would potentially draw upon a variety of financing options, including Public Housing Capital Funds, rental subsidy, Project Based Vouchers, Project Based Rental Assistance Vouchers, and/or Public Housing Operating reserves. In some cases, the FH has planned for the demolition of housing that is obsolete; where public housing units are demolished, the FH will replace them with housing of better quality elsewhere within the city. The FH 2020 Annual Plan states that three of the city’s public housing sites are being considered for disposition and conversion to a different low-income housing type or community facility. These three sites are Pacific Gardens, Yosemite Village – Phase 2, and Fairview Heights Terrace. Seventy-four of the units at Yosemite Village – Phase 2 are also being considered for demolition or disposition to be converted to a Low-Income Housing Tax Credit site. Three sites are also planned for conversion under the RAD program between 2019 and 2021: Yosemite Village (69 units), Parc Grove II (31 units), and Pacific Gardens (22 units). Conversion of these sites under the RAD program may include either demolition, rehabilitation or new construction at these sites. Actions to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership The FH offers a number of activities for residents to increase their involvement in management and set them on the path to homeownership. As identified in its 2020 Annual PHA Plan, the FH conducts a financial literacy course through its Faith and Finance Program. The housing authority has also partnered with Self Help Enterprises to create a homeownership class and financial literacy workshop for residents with higher incomes. FH partners with Habitat for Humanity to help residents achieve homeownership. If the PHA is designated as troubled, describe the manner in which financial assistance will be provided or other assistance Not applicable – the Fresno Housing Authority is not designated as “troubled.” Consolidated Plan FRESNO 184 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities – 91.220(i) Introduction The City of Fresno is covered by the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care, a network of service providers covering Fresno and Madera counties. The Fresno Madera Continuum of Care brings together housing and service providers to meet the needs of individuals and families experiencing homelessness. Describe the jurisdictions one-year goals and actions for reducing and ending homelessness including: Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs Over the next year, the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care and other homeless housing and service providers in the city of Fresno will continue reaching out to homeless persons, including unsheltered persons, through street outreach, day centers, and emergency shelter services. For the 2020 program year, the City will fund organizations and/or projects for a variety of activities, including street outreach and needs assessment, through the Emergency Solutions Grants program. Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons During the 2020 program year, the City will fund nonprofit organizations and/or projects for the following emergency shelter and transitional housing activities: • Emergency shelter and supportive services • Rapid rehousing services Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again During the 2020 program year, the City of Fresno will prioritize the funding of permanent housing for people experiencing homelessness. In determining allocation of CDBG and ESG, the City will prioritize low-barrier permanent housing and optional supportive services for individuals and families living in permanent housing, consistent with a Housing First approach. The City will fund nonprofit organizations for the following activities to prevent homelessness and to support people experiencing homelessness make the transition to permanent housing: Consolidated Plan FRESNO 185 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Homelessness prevention • Rapid Rehousing The City will also work to increase the availability of affordable housing in the city by using HOME funds to support the development of affordable housing, including housing for seniors and people with disabilities, and to provide housing rehabilitation for low-income homeowners. Finally, the City will take steps to implement the strategies in its Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, which includes strategies to support housing affordability in the city. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 186 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low-income individuals and families and those who are: being discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions); or, receiving assistance from public or private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs Over the next year, housing and service providers in the City of Fresno will continue to work together to prevent homelessness in populations who are vulnerable to or at risk of homelessness. The City will support the following homelessness prevention programs during the 2020 program year: • Homelessness prevention Consolidated Plan FRESNO 187 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-70 HOPWA Goals - 91.220 (l)(3) The City will continue to prioritize short-term rent, mortgage, and utility assistance; tenant-based rental assistance; and transitional housing throughout the 5-year period covered by this Consolidated Plan. Goals for the number of households to be provided housing through HOPWA funds have increased in proportion with funding increases for the HOPWA program for the 2020 program year. One-year goals for the number of households to be provided housing through the use of HOPWA for: Short-term rent, mortgage, and utility assistance to prevent homelessness of the individual or family (STRMU) 26 Tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA) 20 Units provided in permanent housing facilities developed, leased, or operated with HOPWA funds 0 Units provided in transitional short-term housing facilities developed, leased, or operated with HOPWA funds 20 Total 66 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 188 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-75 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.220(j) Actions planned to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment: The City of Fresno will continue to implement activities that remove barriers to affordable housing, such as its 50% permit fee reduction for residential projects in inner city areas, such as Highway City, Pinedale and Herndon Townsite. In its 2019 Downtown Displacement Report, the City also acknowledged its current opportunity to help preserve affordable housing in downtown and plans to prevent the displacement of current residents through its Downtown Displacement Program. Finally, the city will strengthen its police services in high crime areas and increase its provision of fair housing services to aid neighborhoods where affordable housing already exists. AP-85 Other Actions – 91.220(k) Introduction This section details the City of Fresno’s actions planned to ensure safe and affordable housing for its residents, along with plans to meet underserved needs, reduce poverty, develop institutional structure, and enhance coordination between public and private sector housing and community development agencies. Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs To help remove obstacles to meeting underserved needs and improve service delivery, the City of Fresno supports the continued development of the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care, a comprehensive coordinated homeless housing and services delivery system that assists people experiencing homelessness in making the transition from homelessness to independent or supportive permanent housing, and in accessing education, health and mental health services, employment training, and life skills development. The City will provide funding for the following to address underserved needs: • Homelessness prevention • Outreach/ emergency shelter • Rapid Rehousing • Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS/HIV Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing The City of Fresno will fund multiple programs to foster housing affordability, including continuing to use HOME funds to support development of affordable housing by a local CHDO. In addition to specific programs designed to foster and maintain affordable housing, the City will review its zoning ordinances for prospective barriers to affordable housing development and make amendments as needed. The City is also currently in the process of developing an updated Analysis of Impediments Consolidated Plan FRESNO 189 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) to Fair Housing Choice. As a result of this study, the City will undertake additional approaches to fostering fair and affordable housing. Actions planned to reduce lead-based paint hazards Over the next year, the City of Fresno will continue to conduct lead-based paint inspections and, if a hazard is found, remediation. These actions will both reduce lead exposure risk and help to maintain the city’s older, lower and moderately priced housing. Any housing rehabilitation activities conducted using HOME and CDBG funds will continue to monitor closely for any potential lead exposure. Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty-level families Over the 2020 program year, the City of Fresno will continue to collaborate with the Continuum of Care through the ESG program to coordinate with homeless, housing, and service providers. Homeless service providers will continue to offer job search and resume assistance and connections to workforce development opportunities, as well as emergency shelter, transitional housing, and services such as food, clothing, and childcare. A focus on development of affordable housing and permanent housing that is located near transportation will also help poverty-level families access more employment opportunities, while lowering transportation and housing costs. Actions planned to develop institutional structure The City of Fresno has developed a robust administrative structure to manage its CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funds. The City’s Department of Housing and Community Development offers seminars for potential subrecipients, CHDOs, and contractors to learn more about the CDBG and HOME programs. In addition to working with organizations, the City’s citizen participation process is designed to make engaged and informed citizens another vital part of the institutional structure. City plans focused on affordable housing, homelessness, and workforce development provide overarching goals and frameworks for collaboration among agencies and the use of federal, state, local, and other funding. Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies The City will work to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies by working to implement the strategies detailed in the Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) plan, including addressing the gaps in the institutional and service delivery systems discussed in section SP-40 of this plan. Public housing in Fresno is managed by the Fresno Housing Authority. The quasi‐governmental authority is governed by 14 Commissioners – seven of whom are appointed as City Commissioners and seven of whom are appointed as County Commissioners. According to HUD’s data on assisted housing, there are 630 public housing units in the city of Fresno. The Fresno Housing Authority will continue to partner with area agencies and organizations to offer opportunities for residents including: Consolidated Plan FRESNO 190 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Housing counseling for first-time homebuyers • Self-sufficiency training • Services and housing for people experiencing homelessness, through programs such as the Fresno Housing Homeless Pilot Program and rapid rehousing programs • Homelessness prevention Consolidated Plan FRESNO 191 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS AP-90 Program Specific Requirements – 91.220(l)(1,2,4) Introduction Projects planned with CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table (see AP-35). The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out. Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(1) Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out. 1. The total amount of program income that will have been received before the start of the next program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed $0 2. The amount of proceeds from section 108 loan guarantees that will be used during the year to address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in the grantee's strategic plan $0 3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements $0 4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the planned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan. $0 5. The amount of income from float-funded activities $0 Total Program Income $0 Other CDBG Requirements 1. The amount of urgent need activities $0 2a. The estimated percentage of CDBG funds that will be used for activities that benefit persons of low and moderate income. 100% 2b. Specify the years covered that include this Annual Action Plan. PY 2020 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 192 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(2) 1. A description of other forms of investment being used beyond those identified in Section 92.205 is as follows: The City will not employ other forms of investment beyond those identified in Section 92.205. 2. A description of the guidelines that will be used for resale or recapture of HOME funds when used for homebuyer activities as required in 92.254, is as follows: The City will use the recapture provisions in all cases where a homebuyer subsidy exists. For HOME-funded homebuyer assistance loans, the Promissory Note, Deed of Trust, Declaration of Restrictions, and the Homebuyer Agreement are the enforcement mechanisms for the City's recapture provisions. The City will enforce minimum periods of affordability based on the amount of homebuyer subsidy provided to the buyer of not less than: • Five years for less than $15,000, • Ten years for between $15,000-$40,000, and • Fifteen years for more than $40,000. Recapture provisions are based on 24 CFR 92.254 (a) (5) (ii), which stipulates the conditions for recapture of the HOME investment used to assist low-income families in purchasing a home. Homebuyer recapture provisions are included in, or as a deed restriction rider, to the recorded deed of trust that secures a HOME loan Note, and requires recapture of funds if the home does not continue to be the borrower’s principal residence or if all or any part of the property or any interest in it is sold, rented, conveyed or transferred during the duration of the period of affordability. Recapture provisions also stipulate that only the direct subsidy to the homebuyer is subject to recapture, which includes down payment assistance, closing cost, other home assistance provided directly to homebuyer, and the difference between fair market value and the sales price. The net proceeds are the sale price minus the senior loan repayment (other than HOME funds) and any closing costs. If the net proceeds are not sufficient to recapture the full HOME investment plus enable the homeowner to recover the amount of the homeowner’s down payment and any capital improvement investment made by the owner since the purchase, the City may share the net proceeds. The net proceeds may be divided proportionally between the City and the homeowner as set forth in the following mathematical formulas: (𝐻𝑂𝑀𝐸 𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑦 𝑥 𝑁𝑒𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑠) (𝐻𝑂𝑀𝐸 𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑦 + 𝐻𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝑖𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡)= 𝐻𝑂𝑀𝐸 𝑎𝑚𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑏𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑎𝑝𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑑 (𝐻𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝑖𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑥 𝑁𝑒𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑠) (𝐻𝑂𝑀𝐸 𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑦 + 𝐻𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝑖𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 )= 𝐴𝑚𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 𝑡𝑜 ℎ𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑒𝑟 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 193 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) In the event of foreclosure, the amount subject to recapture is based on the amount of net proceeds (if any) from the foreclosure sale. 3. A description of the guidelines for resale or recapture that ensures the affordability of units acquired with HOME funds-see 24 CFR 92.254(a)(4)-are as follows: The City does not refinance existing debt for multifamily housing projects. 4. Plans for using HOME funds to refinance existing debt secured by multifamily housing that is rehabilitated with HOME funds along with a description of the refinancing guidelines required that will be used under 24 CFR 92.206(b), are as follows: As required, a portion of funds will be awarded to a City-certified Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) and the general development community for the new construction or substantial rehabilitation of affordable housing units available to lower income residents. The TBRA program will be administered by the Fresno Housing Authority and will be targeted to homeless households as outlined in the Status Update of the City and County of Fresno 10- Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness. Interested parties apply in person at the Fresno Housing Authority located at 1331 Fulton Street, Monday through Thursday between the hours of 8:00 am and 4:00 pm. An assessment and case management assignments are made in order to determine the level of assistance and program determination. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 194 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Reference 91.220(l)(4) 1. Include written standards for providing ESG assistance (may include as attachment) The City will continue to work cooperatively with Fresno County and the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care (FMCoC) to update the ESG Policies and Procedures. A copy of the current document is included in the Appendix. In addition, the City, County and FMCoC are also continuing to update and document written standards. 2. If the Continuum of Care has established centralized or coordinated assessment system that meets HUD requirements, describe that centralized or coordinated assessment system. The Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) is used by all local homeless providers participating in the FMCoC. HMIS is a database used to track performance and outcomes for the agencies. As the HMIS Lead of the FMCoC, the Fresno Housing Authority plays a critical role in coordinating the annual Point-in-Time Count (PITC), collecting data, and distributing results from the annual count. The work of the Housing Authority in this regard meets and exceeds HUD requirements for the implementation and compliance of Homeless Management Information System Standards. The FMCoC’s Coordinated Entry System utilizes a common assessment tool – the Vulnerability Index (VI). The VI gave the community a way to identify and triage individuals most at risk. The VI was enhanced to the Vulnerability Index Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (VI- SPDAT), which further triaged individual’s priority for housing and other services. All member agencies of the FMCoC have committed to using both the assessment tool and the Coordinated Entry System managed in partnership by FMCoC members. The assessment system is a client-centered process that streamlines access to the most appropriate housing interventions for individuals or families experiencing homelessness. The Multi-Agency Access Program (MAP) Point at the Poverello House (Pov) was the first coordinated physical entry point collectively developed by the Community Conversations stakeholder group. The MAP Point at the Pov serves as a physical location of the Coordinated Entry System. The program has proved successful in its first two years and has begun expansion. Main components of this process include: 1. Assessment, 2. Navigation and Case Conferencing, 3. Housing Referral with Choice, and 4. Data Collection and Communication. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 195 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 3. Identify the process for making sub-awards and describe how the ESG allocation is made available to private nonprofit organizations (including community and faith-based organizations). The City will issue a request for applications for the 2020- 2021 program year following the adoption of the consolidated plan by City Council. Prior to this release, the City consulted with the FMCoC on the needs of homeless in the community and the best use of ESG funds per category. Within the HUD defined homeless categories, the City of Fresno has determined the following sub-populations are a high priority for ESG services: • Unsheltered homeless persons who are living outdoors or in other places not intended for human habitation; • Chronically homeless persons; • Homeless veterans; and • Other homeless persons who have been identified as highly vulnerable. In addition, the following populations are also a priority for ESG services in Fresno: • Unaccompanied youth under the age of 18; • Youth aging out of the foster care system; • Victims of domestic violence; and • Households with children. Proposals that propose to serve these populations will be given additional points in the scoring process. Proposals providing ESG services to populations outside of the identified high priority population will be considered for funding. Bidders may propose to provide all or a portion of the ESG eligible activities stated above. Qualified/eligible vendor(s) are those agencies that are State certified non-profit entities, validly existing in California, with a tax-exempt IRS determination letter, as of the date the bid is submitted, or public agencies that are qualified to receive ESG funds under applicable federal rules. Qualified/eligible vendors are those that have a minimum of two years’ experience serving the beneficiary populations and a minimum of two years’ experience utilizing federal, state and/or local funding. Requests for applications will be widely distributed to an electronic distribution list of over 500 e-mail addresses. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 196 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 4. If the jurisdiction is unable to meet the homeless participation requirement in 24 CFR 576.405(a), the jurisdiction must specify its plan for reaching out to and consulting with homeless or formerly homeless individuals in considering policies and funding decisions regarding facilities and services funded under ESG. During the development of the Consolidated Plan, the City consulted with the FMCoC in making decisions related to ESG funds for the five year cycle. The FMCoC includes representation from the homeless community, which meet the homeless participation requirement in 24 CFR 576.405(a). 5. Describe performance standards for evaluating ESG. The following performance standards are outlined in the City’s adopted written policies, however, updates to the standards are currently under way: 1. Decrease the number of homeless youth and households with children by 10% from the FMCoC Point in Time Count of January 2016. 2. Increase the percentage of participants in transitional housing that move into permanent housing to 80% or more. 3. Increase the percentage of participants that are employed at program exit to 25% or more. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 197 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) APPENDIX A: PUBLIC NOTICES AND CITIZEN OUTREACH Outreach Activities in Support of the November 2019 Workshops and Community Needs Survey • Public notice in the Fresno Bee and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle • Utility bill inserts distributed to 130,000 utility customers in the City of Fresno • Advertisement in CUSD Today (Central Unified School District newsletter) • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers • Digital distribution of flyers to Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools for schools located in the City of Fresno • Project website (www.FresnoConPlanAI.com) logged 818 unique visitors and 994 visits • Facebook posts reached 1,123 individuals and drove 21 engagements • Twitter posts reached 9,652 individuals and drove 45 engagements • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue Consolidated Plan FRESNO 198 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Public Notice - English Consolidated Plan FRESNO 199 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Public Notice - Spanish Consolidated Plan FRESNO 200 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Utility Bill Inserts – English, Spanish, Hmong Consolidated Plan FRESNO 201 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Utility Bill Inserts (Continued) – English, Spanish, Hmong Consolidated Plan FRESNO 202 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Advertisement Consolidated Plan FRESNO 203 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 204 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) - Spanish Consolidated Plan FRESNO 205 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) – Hmong Consolidated Plan FRESNO 206 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Project Website: www.FresnoConPlanAI.com Consolidated Plan FRESNO 207 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 208 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 209 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 210 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media - Twitter Social Media – Facebook (separate post for each meeting) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 211 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Media Calendar Posts Consolidated Plan FRESNO 212 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Media Calendar Posts (Continued) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 213 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Outreach Activities in Support of the December 2019 Workshops and Community Needs Survey • Advertisement in the Fresno Bee • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers, distributed to apartment complexes location near the sites of the meetings • Digital distribution of flyers to Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools for schools located in the City of Fresno and sent home with children at select schools near the sites of meetings • Project website (www.FresnoConPlanAI.com) logged 818 unique visitors and 994 visits • Facebook posts reached 29,475 individuals and drove 89 engagements • Twitter posts reached 9,652 individuals and drove 45 engagements • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue. • Door-to-door canvasing by organization H.O.P.E. (Helping Others Pursue Excellence); hung flyers on doors and engaging with neighborhood residents near the locations of the meetings and at the Christmas Parade – distributed approximately 6,000 door hangers. • News story (earned media) at online news site Global Messenger published in Punjabi and English • News story (earned media) at online news site YourCentralValley.com (KSEE/KGPE) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 214 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Advertisement Consolidated Plan FRESNO 215 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 216 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Project Website: www.FresnoConPlanAI.com Consolidated Plan FRESNO 217 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 218 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media – Facebook (separate post for each meeting) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 219 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media – Twitter Consolidated Plan FRESNO 220 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Media Calendar Posts (Selected) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 221 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Door Hanger Consolidated Plan FRESNO 222 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) News Story – Global Messenger (Page 1) - Punjabi and English Consolidated Plan FRESNO 223 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) News Story – Global Messenger (Page 2) - Punjabi and English Consolidated Plan FRESNO 224 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) News Story – Global Messenger (Page 3) - Punjabi and English Consolidated Plan FRESNO 225 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) News Story – Global Messenger (Page 4) - Punjabi and English Consolidated Plan FRESNO 226 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) News Story – YourCentralValley.com Consolidated Plan FRESNO 227 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Outreach Activities in Support of the January 2020 Workshops • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers, distributed to apartment complexes location near the sites of the meetings, and distributed at the Southeast Asian Family Education Conference at Fresno State University • Digital distribution of flyers to Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools for schools located in the City of Fresno and sent home with children at select schools near the sites of meetings • Project website (www.FresnoConPlanAI.com) logged 818 unique visitors and 994 visits • Facebook posts reached 5,800 individuals and drove 99 engagements • Twitter post reached 5,002 individuals and drove 46 engagements • Nextdoor post reached 12,166 individuals • Push notification to 30,000 users of the City’s resident service app, FresGo • Personalized Email to all prior attendees of Community meetings • Email to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue. • Door-to-door canvasing: hung 1,500 flyers on doors and City staff engaged with neighborhood residents near the locations of the meetings • Participation and flyer distribution at community meetings including the El Dorado Neighborhood meeting and the Winchell Elementary School resident meeting • Printed flyers distributed at food distributions and congregations near the site of community meetings, as well as announcements during services • The El Dorado Park CDC created custom flyers and invited residents attending a local event, and by inviting residents to dinner before the meeting to encourage attendance Consolidated Plan FRESNO 228 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) Project Website: www.FresnoConPlanAI.com Consolidated Plan FRESNO 229 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 230 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media – Facebook (separate post for each meeting) Social Media – Twitter Consolidated Plan FRESNO 231 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media – Nextdoor Consolidated Plan FRESNO 232 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FresGo Push Notification Consolidated Plan FRESNO 233 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Email Distribution – to Previous Attendees Consolidated Plan FRESNO 234 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Media Calendar Posts (Selected) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 235 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Door Hanger Consolidated Plan FRESNO 236 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer Made and Distributed by El Dorado Park CDC Consolidated Plan FRESNO 237 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) APPENDIX B: CITY OF FRESNO REVISED CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN It is the policy of the City of Fresno (City) to provide for full involvement by the community and its residents in the planning, development, implementation and evaluation of programs funded by the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development, including the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships Act (HOME), HEARTH Emergency Solutions Grant (HESG) and the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS/HIV (HOPWA) programs. This Citizen Participation Plan (CPP) sets forth the procedures and guidelines to be implemented by the City to provide for the continuing participation by the citizens of Fresno. The City acknowledges the need for, and the role, of citizen involvement, but also recognizes that the final determination and responsibility for policy development rests with the City Council. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 238 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Citizen Participation Plan Introduction The City of Fresno (City) is a federal entitlement jurisdiction that receives federal grant funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City of Fresno receives federal entitlement grant funding for the following program: ● Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) ● HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) ● Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS (HOPWA) ● Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) As an entitlement jurisdiction, the City is required to prepare a: ● Five Year Consolidated Plan (Consolidated Plan) ● Annual Action Plan (Action Plan) ● Annual Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) Under HUD’s Code of Final Regulations for the Consolidated Plan (24 CFR Part 91 Sec. 91.105), the City must adopt a Citizen Participation Plan (CPP) that sets forth the City’s policies and procedures for citizen participation in the planning, execution, and evaluation of the Consolidated Plan, Action Plans, and CAPER. This CPP provides guidelines for the City to provide and encourage public participation by residents, community stakeholders, and grant beneficiaries in the process of drafting, implementing, and evaluating the Consolidated Plan and related documents. The citizen participation process includes outreach, public hearings, community forums, and opportunities for comment. Definitions ● Annual Action Plan: The Action Plan summarizes the activities that will be undertaken in the upcoming Fiscal Year (FY) to meet the goals outlined in the Consolidated Plan. The Action Plan also identifies the federal and non‐federal resources that will be used to meet the goals of the approved Consolidated Plan. ● Citizen Participation Plan: The CPP provides guidelines by which the City will promote engagement in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of the distribution of federal funds, as outlined in the Consolidated Plan, Action Plan, and CAPERs. ● Community Development Block Grant: HUD’s CDBG program provides communities with resources to address a wide range of housing and community development needs that benefit very low and low‐income persons and areas. ● Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report: The CAPER assesses the City’s annual achievements relative to the goals in the Consolidated Plan and proposed activities in the Action Plan. HUD requires the City to prepare a CAPER at the end of each fiscal year. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 239 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) ● Department Of Housing And Urban Development: HUD is the federal government agency that creates and manages programs pertaining to federal home ownership, affordable housing, fair housing, homelessness, and community and housing development. ● Displacement: Displacement refers to the involuntary relocation of individuals from their residences due to housing development and rehabilitation activities paid for by federal funds. ● Eligible Activity: Activities that are allowable uses of the CDBG funds covered by the CPP as defined in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 24 for HUD. ● Emergency Solutions Grant: HUD’s ESG program provides communities with resources to serve homeless individuals and families via Street Outreach, Emergency Shelter, Homelessness Prevention, Rapid Re‐Housing Assistance, Homeless Management Information System (HMIS), and Administrative Activities. ● Entitlement Jurisdiction: A city with a population of at least 50,000, a central city of a metropolitan area, or a qualified urban county with a population of at least 200,000 that receives grant funding from HUD. ● Five Year Consolidated Plan: HUD requires entitlement jurisdictions to prepare a Consolidated Plan every five years. The Consolidated Plan is a strategic plan that identifies housing, economic, and community development needs and prioritizes funding to address those needs over a five‐year period. ● HOME Investment Partnerships Program: The HUD HOME program provides resources to fund a wide range of activities that build, buy, and/or rehabilitate affordable rental or homeownership housing or provide direct rental assistance to low‐income people. ● Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS: The HUD HOPWA program provides resources that benefit low‐income persons medically diagnosed with HIV/AIDS and their families, including housing and social services, chemical dependency treatment, nutritional services, case management, and assistance with daily living. ● Low‐ and Moderate‐Income: As defined annually by HUD, Low‐ and Moderate‐Income (LMI) is 0‐80 percent of area median family income (AMI) for a jurisdiction, with adjustments for smaller or larger families. This includes those individuals presumed by HUD to be principally LMI (abused children, battered spouses, elderly persons, severely disabled adults, homeless persons, illiterate adults, persons living with AIDS and migrant farm workers). HUD utilizes three income levels to define LMI households: o Extremely low‐income: Households earning 30 percent or less than the AMI (subject to specified adjustments for areas with unusually high or low‐incomes) o Very low‐income: Households earning 50 percent or less than the AMI (subject to specified adjustments for areas with unusually high or low‐incomes) o Low‐ and moderate‐income: Households earning 80 percent or less than the AMI (subject to adjustments for areas with unusually high or low‐incomes or housing costs) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 240 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) ● Public Hearing: Public hearings are designed to provide the public the opportunity to make public testimony and comment. Public hearings related to the Consolidated Plan are to be advertised in local newspapers and made accessible to non‐English speakers and individuals with disabilities. ● Substantial Amendments: Amendments are considered “Substantial” whenever one of the following is proposed: o A change in the allocation priorities or a change in the method of fund distribution. o A change which increases or decreases by 25 percent the amount allocated to a category of funding, or a project or activity budget funded by the entitlement grant programs. o To implement an activity using CDBG funds for new programs that were not described in the Consolidated Plan or the current year Annual Action Plan. o To change the purpose or intended beneficiaries of an activity approved for CDBG funding, e.g., instead of primarily benefitting lower income households the activity instead proposes to benefit mostly moderate income households. Roles, Responsibilities, and Contact Information The City of Fresno is a federal entitlement jurisdiction and is a recipient of grant funding from the federal government. The City of Fresno’s Charter established a council and manager form of government. Fresno’s City Council is the elected legislative body of the City and is responsible for approving its Consolidated Plan, Action Plans, Substantial Amendments, and CAPERs prior to their submission to HUD. It is the intent of the City to provide for and encourage citizen participation, with particular emphasis on participation by lower income persons who are beneficiaries of or impacted by entitlement‐ funded activities. The City encourages participation in all stages of the Consolidated Planning process by all residents, including minorities and non‐English speaking persons, as well as persons with mobility, visual or hearing impairments, and residents of assisted housing developments and recipients of tenant‐based assistance. In general, hearings will be held at City Hall due to its central location, convenient access, and disability accessibility. Translation services will be provided when there is an indication that non ‐ English speaking persons will be attending. Other reasonable accommodations will be provided on a case‐by‐case basis. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 241 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The General Contact Information for the City’s HUD Entitlement Programs is: City of Fresno Thomas Morgan Planning and Development Department Housing and Community Development Division 2600 Fresno Street Room 3065 Fresno, CA 93721 559.621.8300 Phone 559.621.8721 TTY thomas.morgan@fresno.gov Citizen Participation Policies Public Hearings The City will hold at least two public hearings per year to obtain residents' views and to respond to proposals and questions, to be conducted at a minimum of two different stages of the program year. Together, the hearings must address housing and community development needs, development of proposed activities, proposed strategies and actions for affirmatively furthering fair housing consistent with the AFH, and a review of program performance. At least one of these hearings is held before the proposed consolidated plan is published for comment. At least one public hearing per year will be held before City Council. The City Council public hearings will be held at Fresno City Hall, Council Chambers located at 2600 Fresno Street, Room 2097, Fresno, CA 93721. Listening devices, interpretation services, and other assistance to disabled persons or those with limited English proficiency will be provided upon request, ranging up to five business days prior notification to the City Clerk. Requests for disability‐related modifications or accommodations required to facilitate meeting participation, including requests for auxiliary aids, services or interpreters, require different lead times, ranging up to five business days. For this reason, it is important to provide as much advance notice as possible to ensure availability. Assistive Listening Devices (ALDs) are available upon request. Notice of Hearings and Review Periods To allow the public time to provide comments prior to the submission of approved documents to HUD, the City will hold a minimum 30‐day public review and comment period for the Consolidated Plan, Action Plan, and Substantial Amendment. The City will establish a public review period of at least 15 days for each CAPER and amendments to the CPP. Copies of the draft plans will be available to the public at City of Fresno Development and Resource Management, Room 3065, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 242 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The City will place public notices at libraries, recreation centers, community centers, online through the City’s website, and through advertisement in the Fresno Bee in advance of a 30‐day public review and comment period. To ensure that the public, including minorities, persons with limited English proficiency, persons with disabilities, residents of public housing, and LMI residents are able to participate in the public review process, the City will provide residents, public agencies, and other stakeholders with notices on applicable public review periods and public hearings that adhere to the following: ● The notices will be published prior to the start of the public comment period and at least 15 days before the final public hearing and will include information regarding how to request accommodation and services available for persons with disabilities who wish to attend the public hearings. The notices will be distributed to persons and agencies on the contact list maintained by the City for those parties expressing interest in receiving information and updates related to the City’s Consolidated Plan, Action Plan, CAPER, Substantial Amendments and CPP. Interested parties may request to be added to this contact list by sending an email to HCDD@fresno.gov, by calling (559) 621‐8300 or by writing to the Fresno Planning and Development, Room 3065, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721. The notices will be distributed through a variety of methods, including email, newspaper publications and the City’s website at www.f resno.gov. The notices will include information on how to obtain a copy of the draft documents and scheduled hearing dates, times, and locations. The public may file comments on draft plans in writing to the Fresno Planning and Development, Room 3065, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721; via email to HCDD@fresno.gov; by phone at (559) 621‐8300. Comments may also be submitted in person to Fresno Planning and Development, Room 3065, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721, Monday through Friday during business hours, and during the Council adoption hearing. When necessary or applicable, the City may combine notices complying with several individual requirements into one comprehensive notice for dissemination and publication. Comments on Adopted Plans Comments from residents, public agencies, and other stakeholders regarding the adopted Consolidated Plan or related amendments and performance reports may be submitted in writing or verbally to the General Contact at Fresno Planning and Development, Room 3065, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721. Written comments will be referred to appropriate City staff for consideration and response. The City will attempt to respond to all comments within 15 business days and maintain a correspondence file for this purpose. HUD officials will consider public concerns regarding the City’s plans and programs described in this Citizen Participation Plan. Written concerns may be submitted to: Kimberly Nash, Director Community Planning and Development Division U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development San Francisco Regional Office, Region IX, One Sansome Street, Suite 1200, San Francisco, CA 94104‐4430. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 243 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Availability of Draft and Approved Documents The draft and final versions of the Consolidated Plan, Action Plan, all related amendments, records, and regulations will be available online at the City’s website: www.fresno.gov. Hard copies of all documents will be available at Fresno Planning and Development, Room 3065, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721 and upon written request. If the City is unable to provide immediate access to the documents requested, it will make every effort to provide the documents and reports within 15 business days from the receipt of the request. During the 30‐day public review and comment period, copies of the document will be available to the public for review at libraries, recreation centers, community centers, and through the City’s website at www.fresno.gov. Displacement Policy As part of the CPP, the City must maintain a displacement policy. Displacement refers to the involuntary relocation of individuals from their residence due to housing development and rehabilitation paid for with federal funds. The City will continue to use existing federal and state relocation guidelines, as applicable, to minimize displacement and to alleviate the problems caused by displacement. Both the federal government and the State of California have specific requirements dictating the amount of benefits and assistance that must be provided to lower income persons and households relocated from their homes as a result of displacement. Depending on the funding source, displaced persons may be offered one or more of the following: ● A rent subsidy for another unit ● A cash payment to be used for rent or a down payment on the purchase of a dwelling unit ● Moving and related expenses The City’s rehabilitation programs may also incur relocation issues when they provide minor additions to existing dwellings in order to address overcrowding. Any temporary relocation costs are included in the rehabilitation package offered to clients. Technical Assistance The City will, to the extent feasible, respond to requests for technical assistance from entities representing LMI groups who are seeking federal entitlement funding in accordance with grant procedures. This may include, but is not limited to, providing information regarding how to fill out applications, other potential funding sources, and referrals to appropriate agencies within and outside the City. "Technical assistance," as used here, does not include the provision of funds to the entities requesting such assistance. Assistance will also be provided by Department of Housing staff to interested individuals and resident groups who need further explanation on the background and intent of the Housing and Community Development Act, interpretation of specific HUD regulations, and project eligibility criteria for federal grants. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 244 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Development of the Fair Housing Study (AI or successor study) In developing the Fair Housing Study, the City will consult with community-based and regionally- based organizations that represent protected class members, and organizations that enforce fair housing laws, including the Fair Housing Council of Central California and other nonprofit organizations that may receive funding under HUD’s Fair Housing Initiative Program (FHIP) or that may have other specialized knowledge of fair housing within the city. •Introductory Public Hearing: During the preparation of the Fair Housing Study, at least two hearings will be held to obtain the views of the general public on fair housing-related data and affirmatively furthering fair housing in the City’s housing and community development programs. The first public hearing will solicit input on fair housing issues in the city and shall be held during development of the Study, before the draft is published for comment. No later than the date of the first public hearing on the Fair Housing Study, the HUD- provided data and other supplemental data will be made available to the general public. This may include a link to HUD’s website where the data can be readily accessed. •Publication of the Proposed AI: When complete, the City will make available the draft Fair Housing Study for a period of no less than 30 days in a manner that affords citizens, public agencies, and other interested parties a reasonable opportunity to examine its contents and submit comments. Notice of the public comment period on the draft Study will be published in the Fresno Bee. The public notice shall include a brief summary of the content and purpose of the draft Fair Housing Plan, the dates of the public display and comment period, the locations where copies of the draft document can be examined, how comments will be accepted, and when the document will be considered for action by the City Council. A second public hearing will be conducted during or after the 30-day public comment period on the Fair Housing Study during which the City will address identified factors contributing to fair housing issues, and proposed fair housing goals and priorities for affirmatively furthering fair housing. Any comments or views of residents of the community received in writing, or orally at the public hearing, will be considered by the City in preparing the final Fair Housing Study and a summary of these comments or views shall be attached to the final AFH. •Revisions to the Fair Housing Study: The City may revise its Fair Housing Study under the following circumstances: o A material change occurs. A material change is a change in circumstances in the City that affects the information on which the Fair Housing Study is based to the extent that the analysis, the fair housing contributing factors, or the priorities and goals of the Study no longer reflect actual circumstances. Examples include, but are not limited to: ▪Presidentially declared disasters, under Title IV of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), affecting the jurisdiction that are of such a nature as to significantly impact the steps the City may need to take to affirmatively further fair housing ▪Significant demographic changes ▪New significant contributing factors in the city, and ▪Civil rights findings, determinations, settlements (including voluntary compliance agreements), or court orders o Upon HUD's written notification specifying a material change that requires the revision. 1 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice PUBLIC DRAFT – February 2020 Revised March 4, 2020 to improve document accessibility (no content revision) ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE PU BLIC DRAFT – February 2020 CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA Planning and Development Department Housing and Community Development Division Prepared for the City of Fresno by Mosaic Community Planning, LLC Revised 3/27/2020 to extend end of public comment period from 4/3/2020 to 5/20/2020 This is a draft document that has been made available for public review and comment. The Public Comment Period begins February 28 and concludes on May 20. Written comments are encouraged during this time and may be submitted to the City’s Housing and Community Development Division, 2600 Fresno Street (Room 3065); Fresno, California 93721, or via email to HCDD@fresno.gov. Please indicate “Public Comment” in the subject line of email messages. Residents are invited to comment on the draft documents at two upcoming Public Hearings: Wednesday, May 13, 2020 at 5:00 P.M. Public Hearing regarding the Draft Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments Housing and Community Development Commission Meeting Fresno City Hall; Council Chamber Fresno, CA 93721 Thursday, May 14, 2020 at approximately 10:05 A.M. Public Hearing regarding the Draft Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments City Council Meeting Fresno City Hall; 2600 Fresno Street, Council Chamber Fresno, CA 93721 If, as an attendee at a meeting, you need accommodations such as interpreters, signers, assistive listening devices, or the services of a translator, please contact (559) 621-8300 or HCDD@fresno.gov. To ensure availability, you are advised to make the request at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing .................................................................................................. 1 Definitions ................................................................................................................................................ 2 Data Sources ........................................................................................................................................... 3 CHAPTER 2. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION PROCESS .......................................................................... 5 Community Engagement Overview ....................................................................................................... 5 Public Meetings ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Focus Groups ........................................................................................................................................ 8 Stakeholder Interviews .......................................................................................................................... 8 Intercept Interviews ............................................................................................................................... 9 Project Website ..................................................................................................................................... 9 Community Survey .............................................................................................................................. 10 Public Comment Period and Hearing .................................................................................................. 10 Publicity for Community Engagement Activities .................................................................................. 10 Community Engagement Results ........................................................................................................ 10 Community Meetings and Focus Groups ............................................................................................ 11 Stakeholder Interviews ........................................................................................................................ 15 Community Survey .............................................................................................................................. 21 CHAPTER 3. SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE .............................................................................................. 25 Demographic Profile ............................................................................................................................. 25 Race and Ethnicity .............................................................................................................................. 25 National Origin .................................................................................................................................... 25 Limited English Proficiency ................................................................................................................. 26 Disability .............................................................................................................................................. 26 Age ...................................................................................................................................................... 26 Sex ...................................................................................................................................................... 26 Family Type ......................................................................................................................................... 26 Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty ................................................................... 31 CHAPTER 4. SEGREGATION AND INTEGRATION ................................................................................ 35 Race and Ethnicity ................................................................................................................................ 35 Segregation Levels ............................................................................................................................... 42 National Origin and Limited English Proficiency Population ........................................................... 43 CHAPTER 5. ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY .............................................................................................. 48 Overview of HUD-Defined Opportunity Factors ................................................................................. 49 Education ............................................................................................................................................... 52 Employment ........................................................................................................................................... 54 Transportation ....................................................................................................................................... 59 Poverty ................................................................................................................................................... 64 Environmental Health ........................................................................................................................... 69 Food Access .......................................................................................................................................... 73 Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 74 CHAPTER 6. HOUSING PROFILE ............................................................................................................ 76 Housing Supply Summary ................................................................................................................... 76 Housing Costs and Affordability ......................................................................................................... 81 Housing Needs ...................................................................................................................................... 83 Homeownership and Lending .............................................................................................................. 92 Mortgage Lending ............................................................................................................................... 98 Evictions and Housing Instability ...................................................................................................... 101 Zoning, Affordability, and Housing Choice ...................................................................................... 103 Intersection of Local Zoning with Federal and State Fair Housing Laws .......................................... 104 City of Fresno Zoning Ordinance Review ......................................................................................... 107 Impact of Zoning Provisions on Affordable Housing ......................................................................... 111 CHAPTER 7. PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING ................................................................................ 118 Supply and Occupancy ...................................................................................................................... 119 Geography of Supported Housing .................................................................................................... 122 Policy Review ...................................................................................................................................... 126 CHAPTER 8. HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES ................................................................ 128 Residential Patterns ............................................................................................................................ 128 Accessible Housing Supply and Affordability ................................................................................. 132 Zoning and Accessibility .................................................................................................................... 133 Definition of “Family” and Group Housing for People with Disabilities.............................................. 133 Reasonable Accommodations .......................................................................................................... 135 CHAPTER 9. FAIR HOUSING ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................. 137 Fair Housing Resources ..................................................................................................................... 137 Fair Housing Complaints .................................................................................................................... 137 Complaints Filed with HUD ............................................................................................................... 139 Complaints Filed with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing ........................ 142 Complaints Filed with the Fair Housing Council of Central California .............................................. 144 Fair Housing Lawsuits and Litigation ............................................................................................... 146 Past Fair Housing Goals and Related Activities .............................................................................. 148 Administrative Impediments .............................................................................................................. 148 Spatial Impediments .......................................................................................................................... 149 Financial/Affordability Impediments .................................................................................................. 149 Discriminatory Impediments .............................................................................................................. 150 CHAPTER 10. IDENTIFICATION OF IMPEDIMENTS ............................................................................. 152 APPENDIX A: PUBLIC NOTICES AND CITIZEN OUTREACH .............................................................. 163 Outreach Activities in Support of the November 2019 Workshops and Survey .......................... 163 Outreach Activities in Support of the February 13, 2020 Workshop ............................................. 179 1 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Equal access to housing choice is crucial to America’s commitment to equality and opportunity for all. Title VIII of the United States Civil Rights Act of 1968, more commonly known as the Fair Housing Act, provides housing opportunity protection by prohibiting discrimination in the sale or rental of housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. The Act was amended in 1988 to provide stiffer penalties, establish an administrative enforcement mechanism and to expand its coverage to prohibit discrimination on the basis of familial status and disability. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), specifically HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the Fair Housing Act and other civil rights laws. Provisions to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) are basic long-standing components of HUD’s housing and community development programs. The AFFH requirements are derived from Section 808(e) (5) of the Fair Housing Act which requires the Secretary of HUD to administer the Department’s housing and urban development programs in a manner to affirmatively further fair housing.1 Local communities, such as Fresno, that receive grant funds from HUD through its entitlement process satisfy this obligation by performing an “Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice” (AI). In an AI, communities evaluate barriers to fair housing choice and develop and implement strategies and actions to overcome any identified impediments based on their individual histories, circumstances, and experiences. Through this process, local entitlement communities promote fair housing choice for all persons, including classes protected under the Fair Housing Act, and provide opportunities for racially and ethnically inclusive patterns of housing occupancy, identify structural and systemic barriers to fair housing choice, and promote housing that is physically accessible and usable by persons with disabilities. HUD will presume that the grantee is meeting its obligation and certification to affirmatively further fair housing by taking actions that address the impediments, including: • Analyzing and eliminating housing discrimination within the jurisdiction; • Promoting fair housing choice for all persons; • Providing opportunities for racially and ethnically inclusive patterns of housing occupancy; • Promoting housing that is physically accessible to all persons to include those persons with disabilities; and • Fostering compliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of the Fair Housing Act. Through its Community Planning and Development (CPD) programs, HUD’s goal is to expand mobility and widen a person’s freedom of choice. The Department also requires Community 1 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. Fair Housing Planning Guide: Volume 1 (Chapter 1: Fair Housing Planning Historical Overview, Page 13). March 1996. 2 Development Block Grant (CDBG) program grantees to document AFFH actions in the annual performance reports that are submitted to HUD. In 2015, HUD published a final rule on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, which outlines procedures that jurisdictions and public housing authorities who participate in HUD programs must take to promote access to fair housing and equal opportunity. This rule stipulates that grantees and housing authorities take meaningful actions to overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected class characteristics. Under HUD’s final rule, grantees must take actions to: • Address disparities in housing need; • Replace segregated living patterns with integrated and balanced living patterns; • Transform racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity; and • Foster and maintain compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws. To assist grantees and housing authorities affirmatively further fair housing, HUD provides publicly available data, maps, and an assessment tool to use to evaluate the state of fair housing within their communities and set locally determined priorities and goals. HUD’s final rule mandated that most grantees begin submitting to HUD an assessment developed using these tools in 2017; however, a 2018 HUD notice withdrew the requirement to prepare such assessments. A subsequent notice further required that grantees instead prepare and keep on file a current Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. HUD’s data and maps remain available for grantees to use in preparing their AIs. Mosaic Community Planning assisted the City of Fresno with the preparation of this Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. This AI follows the requirements in HUD’s Fair Housing Planning Guide but is also compliant with the regulations and assessment tool established in HUD’s 2015 final rule. In several chapters, it incorporates the maps and data developed by HUD for use by grantees as part of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing final rule. Definitions Affirmatively Further Fair Housing – In keeping with the latest proposed guidance from HUD, to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing Choice (AFFH) is to comply with “the 1968 Fair Housing Act’s obligation for state and local governments to improve and achieve more meaningful outcomes from fair housing policies, so that every American has the right to fair housing, regardless of their race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability or familial status.”2 Fair Housing Choice - In carrying out this Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, the City of Fresno used the following definition of “Fair Housing Choice”: • The ability of persons of similar income levels to have available to them the same housing choices regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, or handicap. 2 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. “HUD Publishes New Proposed Rule on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Choice.” Press Release No. 13-110. July 19, 2013. 3 Impediments to Fair Housing Choice - As adapted from the HUD Fair Housing Planning Guide, impediments to fair housing choice are understood to include: 3 • Any actions, omissions, or decisions taken because of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin which restrict housing choices or the availability of housing choices. • Any actions, omissions, or decisions which have the effect of restricting housing choices or the availability of housing choices on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin. Protected Classes – The following definition of federally protected classes is used in this document: • Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 prohibits housing discrimination based on race, color, national origin or ancestry, sex, or religion. The 1988 Fair Housing Amendments Act added familial status and mental and physical handicap as protected classes. Affordable – Though local definitions of the term may vary, the definition used throughout this analysis is congruent with HUD’s definition: • HUD defines as "affordable" housing that costs no more than 30% of a household's total monthly gross income. For rental housing, the 30% amount would be inclusive of any tenant-paid utility costs. For homeowners, the 30% amount would include the mortgage payment, property taxes, homeowner’s insurance, and any homeowners’ association fees. Data Sources Decennial Census Data – Data collected by the Decennial Census for 2010 and 2000 is used in this Assessment (older Census data is only used in conjunction with more recent data in order to illustrate trends). The Decennial Census data is used by the U.S. Census Bureau to create several different datasets: • 2010 and 2000 Census Summary File 1 (SF 1) – This dataset contains what is known as “100% data,” meaning that it contains the data collected from every household that participated in the Census and is not based on a representative sample of the population. Though this dataset is very broad in terms of coverage of the total population, it is limited in the depth of the information collected. Basic characteristics such as age, sex, and race are collected, but not more detailed information such as disability status, occupation, and income. The statistics are available for a variety of geographic levels with most tables obtainable down to the census tract or block group level. • 2000 Census Summary File 3 (SF 3) – Containing sample data from approximately one in every six U.S. households, this dataset is compiled from respondents who received the “long form” Census survey. This comprehensive and highly detailed dataset contains 3 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. Fair Housing Planning Guide: Volume 1 (Chapter 2: Preparing for Fair Housing Planning, Page 2-17). March 1996. 4 information on such topics as ancestry, level of education, occupation, commute time to work, and home value. The SF 3 dataset was discontinued for the 2010 Census, but many of the variables from SF 3 are included in the American Community Survey. American Community Survey (ACS) – The American Community Survey is an ongoing statistical survey that samples a small percentage of the U.S. population every year, thus providing communities with more current population and housing data throughout the 10 years between censuses. This approach trades the accuracy of the Decennial Census Data for the relative immediacy of continuously polled data from every year. ACS data is compiled from an annual sample of approximately 3 million addresses rather than an actual count (like the Decennial Census’s SF 1 data) and therefore is susceptible to sampling errors. This data is released in two different formats: single-year estimates and multi-year estimates. • ACS Multi-Year Estimates – More current than Census 2010 data, this dataset is one of the most frequently used. Because sampling error is reduced when estimates are collected over a longer period of time, 5-year estimates will be more accurate (but less recent) than 1-year estimates. The 2012-2016 ACS 5-year estimates are used most often in this assessment. HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool (AFFH-T) – HUD’s AFFH Data and Mapping Tool provides a series of online, interactive maps and data tables to assist grantees in preparing fair housing analyses. Topics covered include demographics and demographic trends; racial and ethnic segregation; housing problems, affordability, and tenure; locations of subsidized housing and Housing Choice Voucher use; and access to educational, employment, and transportation opportunities. This report uses HUD’s latest data and maps, AFFHT0004, which was released in November 2017. HUD’s source data includes the American Community Survey (ACS), Decennial Census / Brown Longitudinal Tract Database (BLTD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD), HUD’s Inventory Management System (IMS) / Public and Indian Housing (PIH) Information Center (PIC), and others. For a complete list of data sources, please see HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Data Documentation available online at https://www.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/AFFH-T-Data-Documentation- AFFHT0004-November-2017.pdf. Previous Works of Research – This AI is supported by, and in some cases builds upon, previous local plans and works of research conducted by or for the City of Fresno or other regional partners, including: • City of Fresno 2015-2019 Consolidated Plan • City of Fresno 2019-2020 Annual Action Plan • City of Fresno Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Reports (CAPERs) for Program Years 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 • 2016 City of Fresno Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice • Fresno General Plan 2015-2023 Housing Element • Greater Fresno Region DRIVE Plan • Fresno Parks Master Plan • Fresno Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan 5 CHAPTER 2. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION PROCESS Community Engagement Overview An important component of the research process for this Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice involved gathering input regarding fair and affordable housing conditions, perceptions, and needs in the Fresno. The project team used a variety of approaches to achieve meaningful public engagement with residents and other stakeholders, including public meetings, focus groups, interviews, a website comment form, and a community-wide survey. OVER 1,500 FRESNO RESIDENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS WERE ENGAGED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS AI THROUGH MEETINGS, FOCUS GROUPS, INTERVIEWS, A SURVEY, AND INTERACTION WITH THE PROJECT WEBSITE. Public Meetings Three rounds consisting of a total of 16 public meetings were held to inform residents and other stakeholders of the City’s planning process and to and gather information for the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. The first round of ten meetings was held in early November to introduce the community to the planning process, provide information on ways to get involved, and collect input on housing needs and fair housing concerns. These meetings began with a short overview of the AI followed by an interactive, facilitated discussion of fair housing, neighborhood conditions, and community resources in the community. These public meetings had both Spanish and Hmong interpreters present and were live-captioned to keep the meeting content accessible to participants with disabilities. The meetings were advertised as having refreshments and as welcoming children to encourage attendance. The City of Fresno held three follow-up meetings in December to bolster engagement with residents of key neighborhoods in southwest Fresno. These meetings utilized a small group breakout format, where each group of 2-4 attendees was facilitated by a City of Fresno staff person allowing for more detailed discussion of needs and issues. Finally, a third round of three public meetings was held in January for the purpose of collecting feedback from residents and stakeholders on a draft set of community priorities. These meetings also used a small group breakout format to collect detailed reactions and recommended revisions to the priorities. In all, 168 people attended the public meetings. Meeting dates, times, and locations are shown on the following page. 6 Public Meeting #1 November 2, 2019 10:30 AM Teague Elementary School 4725 N. Polk Avenue, Fresno, CA 93722 Public Meeting #2 November 2, 2019 1:00 PM Discovery Center 1944 N. Winery Avenue, Fresno, CA 93703 Public Meeting #3 November 2, 2019 3:00 PM Inspiration Park 5770 W. Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 93722 Public Meeting #4 November 4, 2019 6:00 PM Kirk Elementary School 2000 E. Belgravia Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706 Public Meeting #5 November 4, 2019 6:30 PM Pinedale Elementary School 7171 North Sugar Pine Avenue, Fresno, CA 93650 Public Meeting #6 November 4, 2019 6:30 PM Vang Pao Elementary School 4100 E. Heaton Avenue, Fresno, CA 93702 Public Meeting #7 November 5, 2019 4:00 PM Highway City 5140 N. State Street, Fresno, CA 93722 Public Meeting #8 November 5, 2019 6:00 PM Webster Elementary School 2600 E. Tyler Avenue, Fresno, CA 93701 Public Meeting #9 November 5, 2019 6:30 PM Centennial Elementary School 3830 E. Saginaw Way, Fresno, CA 93726 Public Meeting #10 November 6, 2019 5:00 PM City of Fresno City Hall 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721 Public Input Feedback Meeting #1 December 9, 2019 6:00 PM Leavenworth Elementary School 4420 E. Thomas Avenue, Fresno, CA 93702 Public Input Feedback Meeting #2 December 10, 2019 5:30 PM Ted C. Willis Community Center 770 N. San Pablo Avenue, Fresno, CA 93728 Public Input Feedback Meeting #3 December 12, 2019 6:00 PM Williams Elementary School 525 W. Saginaw Way, Fresno, CA 93705 Draft Priorities Feedback Meeting #1 January 21, 2020 6:00 PM Sal Mosqueda Community Center 4670 E. Butler Avenue, Fresno, CA 93702 Draft Priorities Feedback Meeting #2 January 22, 2020 6:00 PM Wesley United Methodist Church 1343 E. Barstow Avenue, Fresno, CA 93710 Draft Priorities Feedback Meeting #3 January 23, 2020 6:00 PM West Side Seventh Day Adventist Church 2750 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, Fresno, CA 93706 7 FIGURE 1. LOCATIONS OF CONSOLIDATED PLAN COMMUNITY OUTREACH EVENTS 8 Focus Groups In addition to the public meetings, two focus groups were held to collect input from youth and seniors on issues related to fair housing. As with the public meetings, these groups typically began with an explanation of the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. The focus group leader them facilitated a discussion of fair and affordable housing needs, neighborhood conditions, and community resources in the City of Fresno. The Senior Focus Group included 36 participants and 30 students participated in the Teen/Pre-Teen Focus Group for a total of 66 participants combined. A list of the focus groups, along with their meeting dates, times, and locations is shown below: Senior Focus Group November 4, 2019 11:30 AM Ted C. Willis Community Center 7770 N. San Pablo Avenue, Fresno, CA 93728 Teen/Pre-Teen Focus Group November 5, 2019 5:30 PM Maxie L. Parks Community Center 1802 E. California Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706 Stakeholder Interviews During the week of November 3, 2019, individual and small group stakeholder interviews were held at locations in Fresno. For people unable to attend an in-person interview, telephone interviews were offered. Stakeholders were identified by City staff and represented a variety of viewpoints including fair housing/legal advocacy, housing, affordable housing, community development and planning, education, employment, homelessness, people with disabilities, and others. Interview invitations were made by email and/or phone to a list of stakeholders compiled by the project team with input from the City of Fresno. A total of 40 stakeholders within the Fresno community participated in an interview with the project team. Organizations from which one or more representatives participated in the development of this AI via an interview, meeting attendance, or any other means include the following: • Access Plus Capital • California Apartment Association • Central California Legal Services • Central Valley Regional Center • City of Fresno Long Range Planning • City of Fresno Public Works • City of Fresno Transportation Department • Elder Abuse Services • Fair Housing Council of Central California • Fresno Building Healthy Community • Fresno City Council • Fresno City Planning Commission • Fresno Council of Governments • Fresno Housing Authority • Fresno Metro Ministry • Fresno Police Department • Hearing Service Center • Highway City Community Development • Lowell Community Development Corporation • Marjaree Mason Center • Navigating Structures • Orange Center School District • Resources for Independence Central Valley • RH Community Builders • Sanger Unified School District • Transform Fresno • WestCare California, Inc. 9 Intercept Interviews A team of City staff conducted intercept interviews at Inspiration Park (5770 W. Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 9372) on a busy Saturday afternoon, November 2, 2019. The interviewers approached families and individuals as they were picnicking and enjoying the playground with a set of short, informal questions designed to engage residents informally about areas and issues they would like to see improved within the city. Participation varied, with some residents willing to speak at length and others more succinctly listing just a few issues for improvement. One common theme was an expression of appreciation for the City’s effort to be out on a Saturday to hear directly from residents. In all, 13 residents participated in an intercept interview. Project Website A standalone website specifically for the City’s Consolidated Plan and Analysis of Impediments project was developed and hosted at www.FresnoConPlanAI.com to be both an information resource for the community and to facilitate input and engagement. The project website was continually updated with meeting details, contained a link to the community survey, offered fact sheets on each of the City’s grant programs, and linked to HUD’s AFFH Mapping Tool so that residents could find and easily access the full set of HUD-provided data for analysis in the AI. The website received 994 visits from 818 unique users over the course of the project. Three comments were submitted for the project team’s consideration through an online comment form located on the website. 10 Community Survey A final method for obtaining community input was a 29-question survey available to the general public, including people living or working in the City of Fresno or other stakeholders. The survey was available online and in hard copy, in English, Spanish and Hmong, from October to December 2019. Paper copies were available at the public meetings and other related events held throughout the study area. A total of 500 survey responses were received, including four that were completed in Spanish (although 28% of the English version respondents indicated that they live in multi-lingual households). Public Comment Period and Hearing The City of Fresno will hold a public comment period to receive input on the draft Analysis of Impediments in Winter 2020. Further information about the comment period, including any public comments received, will be included here in the final draft of this document. Publicity for Community Engagement Activities The City of Fresno executed a robust community engagement strategy for this AI and the associated Consolidated Plan. The public meetings were all held at local schools, community centers, churches, and other venues across the city with a goal of making them more accessible to the public than traditional city government buildings. The initial slate of nine public meetings was advertised via a press release posted on the city’s website, through inserts in water bills mailed to all the City’s residential addresses, to families of school-aged children through Peachjar (a flyer distribution system used in multiple local school districts), and a public notice published in the Fresno Bee. The second round of public meetings held in December were advertised by volunteers who placed 10,000 door hangers at residences in southwest Fresno and the neighborhoods surrounding the three meeting locations. The third round of public feedback meetings held in January was similarly advertised through doorhangers and social media. Wherever practical, all meeting notices, flyers, doorhangers, and other promotional material contained information in English, Spanish, and Hmong. A project website built specifically for the City’s AI and Consolidated Plan project received 994 visits from 818 unique users over the course of the project. Community Engagement Results Listed below are the summarized comments from interviews, community meetings, and focus groups, as well as a summary of survey results. All input was considered in the development of this AI, and no comments or surveys were not accepted. Note that these comments do not necessarily reflect the views of the City of Fresno or Mosaic Community Planning. 11 Community Meetings and Focus Groups 1. What types of housing needs are greatest in Fresno? Are there parts of the city where the need is greater than others? Housing Development • Affordable housing. • Single-family homes. • Three- to four-bedroom units for larger-sized families, including larger-sized subsidized units. • Mixed income neighborhoods to allow opportunity for people at all income levels. • Infill. Developers are afraid of infill because you can still build outward or build in other counties. There needs to be a way for infill development to work out for private developers, e.g. tax abatements. • Multi-family housing. There is an unspoken policy that this means more multi-family will go south because the people in the Northeast and Northwest will not accept it. • Addressing NIMBYism, which stops a lot of projects. Homelessness and Homelessness Prevention • Assistance with barriers such as paying the security deposit, bad credit, inability to save first and last month’s rent. • Services and subsidized housing for people who are homeless. • Shelters that accommodate families. Currently, families have to be separated. Families end up staying in their vehicle to keep the family together. A lot of people live in a family member’s home or garage. • Homeless resources that are not located in the southernmost part of city with no resources – in a place where no one can see the homeless population. • A range of housing for the homeless, from emergency shelter to transitional housing to housing choice vouchers. • Housing earmarked for people who are homeless with a voucher. There is so much pressure on service providers to get them housed. • More emphasis on homelessness prevention and creative solutions to chronic homelessness rather than just moving people. Tiny homes, one stop shop with services and bathrooms, rental readiness screening, and public properties used as safe places for people sleeping in their cars. Accessible Housing • Affordable, accessible and integrated housing for people with disabilities. Integrated means living where you want to live. This includes inclusionary housing with larger units that accommodate children. A lot of new apartments are affordable but not accessible or integrated. • Financial assistance for home modifications to improve accessibility for people with disabilities, particularly in the 93722 ZIP code. Even a ramp can be costly and involve red tape. People end up having to move to somewhere they may not want to live. 12 • Safe and accessible housing for deaf people, including video phones and internet for video phones. For those who speak ASL, these features are needed for emergencies and for social purposes. Housing Improvements • Mobile home improvements, particularly accessibility accommodations, weatherization, and roof repairs for seniors. There is a tremendous need among seniors living in mobile home parks and Habitat for Humanity may be able to assist with roof repairs if they had more funding. • Home repair is needed throughout the city, including in North Fresno. Funding should be available to eligible households everywhere, particularly seniors. • Major need for housing rehab (roofs, windows, paint, etc.) and code enforcement in South Fresno. Homes there should be improved for South Fresno residents rather than building new housing that existing residents can’t afford. Code enforcement needs to be proactive rather than waiting for calls. Rental Assistance and Homebuyer Programs • First time homebuyer programs and assistance, particularly if you can combine local assistance with other downpayment assistance funds from the State. • An improved Section 8 voucher administration process. Landlords have to wait three months for the housing authority to do inspections, plus an additional 45 days before they can fill each unit. • Difficulty using Section 8 vouchers. Payment standards are lower than market rents, so voucher holders are unable to find somewhere to use their vouchers. • Covenants that keep housing at an affordable rate. 2. What parts of the city are generally seen as areas of opportunity (i.e. places people aspire to live, places that offer good access to schools, jobs, and other amenities)? What makes them attractive places to live? Are there barriers someone might face in moving to one of these areas? • North of Herndon. Bullard is in between. • Northern Fresno, if you have transportation. Without transportation, the area of opportunity might be downtown. • Woodward Park and Northeast Fresno, but it’s hard to move into these areas. There also may not be buses there. • Sunnyside, north of Shaw, has grocery stores and is on the bus line. • Tower district has cultural, arts, queer resources. • Kings Canyon and Cedar areas have government services. • Price and income are barriers. • Most areas with amenities are predominantly white and predominantly evangelical and conservative. They are not open to black people. People get mistreated when minorities move into white neighborhoods. 13 • Residents of high-income areas don’t want low- and moderate-income housing there. NIMBYism is an issue. • It isn’t that people are looking to move to areas of opportunity. They want to stay in their neighborhoods and have opportunity. • A neighborhood of choice is a place where you want to be, you have relationships, you have access to transportation, you can get to your child’s school. Sometimes we put that on an affluent neighborhood, but there is value in diverse communities. • When we put all senior, veterans or affordable housing in one area, we are not creating diverse communities. We are not creating places of opportunity when we are putting all resources in one area. • Neighborhoods are reliant on transportation. There is a disconnect in certain communities. If you can live in the north side, there is no Queen of Sierra Vista (MediCal provider). Buses out there only run once an hour. 3. Do residents of similar incomes generally have the same range of housing options? Are there any barriers other than income/savings that might impact housing choices? Are you aware of any housing discrimination? • People with poor credit scores pay additional fees or may not get housing. • Slumlords take advantage of people who are locked out of the system. A renter gets housing but has to do their own maintenance for fear that they would be evicted if they complained. • One apartment complex had no heat for a month in the winter. These were Southeast Asian folks who were older and vulnerable. • Latinos in central valley are scared to report things because of their citizenship status. • Apartment complexes are not providing accessible parking. • Disabled housing applicants place complaints about service dogs being considered pets. • Deaf clients use a payee service which pays rent on the 3rd of the month. If it arrives late, on 4th of 5th, they get a late fee. • Southwest Fresno (93706 zip code) has been redlined, leading to dilapidated properties. Underutilized property may be purchased by outside investors rather than being fixed up into housing for neighborhood residents. • Minimum rents create discrimination, even when people have Section 8 vouchers. • Housing access is based on income and what you can afford. • I am not aware of housing discrimination. 4. Are people in Fresno segregated in where they live? What causes this segregation to occur? • People with poor credit scores pay additional fees or may not get housing. • Slumlords take advantage of people who are locked out of the system. A renter gets housing but has to do their own maintenance for fear that they would be evicted if they complained. • One apartment complex had no heat for a month in the winter. These were Southeast Asian folks who were older and vulnerable. • Latinos in central valley are scared to report things because of their citizenship status. 14 • Apartment complexes are not providing accessible parking. • Disabled housing applicants place complaints about service dogs being considered pets. • Deaf clients use a payee service which pays rent on the 3rd of the month. If it arrives late, on 4th of 5th, they get a late fee. • Southwest Fresno (93706 zip code) has been redlined, leading to dilapidated properties. Underutilized property may be purchased by outside investors rather than being fixed up into housing for neighborhood residents. • Minimum rents create discrimination, even when people have Section 8 vouchers. • Housing access is based on income and what you can afford. • I am not aware of housing discrimination. 5. What types of fair housing services (education, complaint investigation, testing, etc.) are offered in the area? Who offers them? How well are they coordinated with the work of other organizations in the community? • Central California Legal Services (CCLS) provides some assistance and tenant advocacy. They are limited because they can only serve people who are legal citizens. They help if the landlord is not fixing things or if you are getting evicted. • CCLS coordinates better now. They joined the Continuum of Care and attend all the meetings. They are partnering to do a homeless prevention pilot project. • Tenants Together has not been staffed for the past few years. • Faith in the Valley highlights slumlords and work around the Rental Housing Improvement Act (RHIA). They organize around housing issues, but do not do direct services. • The California Apartment Association (CAA) has a class every year on fair housing. Large companies will send their employees. The CAA teaches landlords how to abide by the law, not to get around it. • HUD takes fair housing complaints but few people would know that process. • There is a gap in terms of direct service organizations, e.g. where to go to ask questions about lease, landlord-tenant questions. • I do not know. 6. Are public resources (e.g. parks, schools, roads, police & fire services, etc.) available evenly throughout all neighborhoods in the city? Do some areas get more/less than their share? • Basics like sidewalks and road conditions are not even throughout the city. For example, West Fresno has roads that are falling apart. Even if spending on these things is even now, conditions differ and improvements are needed in some areas more than others. • The further north you go, the faster and more present the services are, especially regarding law enforcement. The further south you go, the more acceptable criminal activity can be. • Transportation should be improved, particularly with lower prices for seniors, people with disabilities, and people who are homeless. 15 • Southwest Fresno has less resources or resources in worse shape than other parts of the city, and these gaps are a form of racism by the City. Schools are worse, Boys and Girls Club building is vacant, and the Maxie Park Community Center has not been kept up. The neighborhood is disheartened and wants to see its existing assets strengthened. • Grant funds are allocated for Southwest Fresno or based on its residents’ demographics, yet these funds may go to other parts of the city. For example, money that was to be spent in Southwest Fresno was almost used in downtown instead. • The City now has Go Fresno app where you can submit issues. You must have a phone, be tech savvy and speak English. So, it only serves a small population. • I have not heard that fire is an issue. • Since the “No Camping” ordinance, parks are getting more attention. It seems focused on cleanliness, but not on enforcing other laws. Stakeholder Interviews 1. What types of housing needs are greatest in Fresno? Are there parts of the city where the need is greater than others? • Affordable housing is needed, but the overarching issue is poverty, which often leads to high turnover. There’s a need to create as many long-term affordable units as possible, including through affordability covenants and increased density. • Homeownership assistance could help with stability, but for-sale inventory is generally low. • Affordable housing in areas with perceived safety. There is plenty of affordable housing in Fresno, but it’s located in an area where you wouldn’t want to raise a family due to gang activity and a lack of grocery store and other conveniences. Affordable units are needed is in Northwest and Northeast Fresno. • A greater mix of housing options. Fresno’s housing stock is mostly single-family detached and some multifamily. There are virtually no condos or townhomes for purchase, and no multifamily housing for moderate / middle income groups or in North Fresno. • Multifamily apartment communities, including studios. Developers will only build affordable multifamily non-senior units if required to do so. • Larger housing units for big families. • Affordable housing is needed throughout the city and a variety of price points reaching into moderate- and-middle income groups (retail workers, teachers, etc.) Housing Authority properties are usually completely pre-leased before they open, with long wait lists. • There are not mixed-income neighborhoods here. Most rentals are in Southwest and Southeast Fresno and are either Section 8 units or require significant repair. • Stakeholders’ thoughts on inclusionary zoning are mixed – some mention it as a mechanism to create more affordable housing, another identifies it as something that will perpetuate northern sprawl. • Housing development has been a result of sprawl rather than intentional planning, with little vision or guiding policy at the City. Sprawl draws resources away from South and Central Fresno and to the north. 16 • Section 8 buying power is lower than market rents, even though the Housing Authority recently revisited payment standards. Voucher holders have trouble finding units to rent. • Transit oriented housing development, although marketability and return on investment may not support it, and affordable housing along transit corridors. • Rehabilitation and addressing blight, including code enforcement of rental properties. In Southwest and Central Fresno, rents are escalating • Bridge housing and rapid rehousing with transition to permanent supportive housing. Diversion and early intervention are key in preventing or limiting homelessness. A lot of housing programs just give housing but no support services. • Emergency solutions, homeless housing and shelters. Re-entry assistance – housing is hard to get in to and people may not be familiar with processes for apply for affordable housing. • There is no group in the community focusing on homeless families rather than single people. • Housing for people with developmental disabilities. Affordability, safety, and landlords who understand their clients are important. Difficulty obtaining housing and evictions are common. • Elderly housing. 2. What parts of the city are generally seen as areas of opportunity (i.e. places people aspire to live, places that offer good access to schools, jobs, and other amenities)? What makes them attractive places to live? Are there barriers someone might face in moving to one of these areas? • Northeast and Northwest Fresno have good schools and beautiful parks. Cost, transportation, and lack of multifamily and smaller housing units are barriers to moving there. Also, people may want to stay in places where they have neighborhood ties rather than move. Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) attitudes are barriers to multifamily development there. • North Fresno and Downtown offer good access to jobs. • Schools district with better test scores (e.g. Clovis, Central, Sanger). • North of Herndon Avenue or north of Shaw Avenue. There is a lack of more affordable housing in those areas, for example housing without government subsidy. Homes are $400,000 - $1 million compared to south Fresno where homes cost $150,000. Rent is $900 in south Fresno vs. $1800 in north Fresno. Transportation could also be a barrier; the area is very auto-oriented. • Tower District. • There are condos in Pinedale, but this is also an area with a higher crime rate. • South Fresno has good transportation to take people from home to work or shopping. • Southeast Fresno, because people are seeing how this area is developing. Affordability would be a barrier. Homes are starting at $300,000. There are no rental units unless people are renting their homes. The accessibility is there because of highway. • Hmong community wants to live near their relatives. Family support – babysitters, drop off kids for a few hours. Families are clustered, because families look to each other for resources. 17 • For people with developmental disabilities, safety is a key factor and varies from neighborhood to neighborhood even within the same area of the city. West Fresno has some nice spots. • Availability and affordability of accessible housing is a potential barrier for people with disabilities, regardless of area within the city. 3. Do residents of similar incomes generally have the same range of housing options? Are there any barriers other than income/savings that might impact housing choices? Are you aware of any housing discrimination? • Housing options are not the same due to differences in assets. African American families often have fewer assets than white families and could have more difficulty obtaining housing. • Housing discrimination probably happens based on stereotypes and landlords’ personal biases. People of different races and ethnicities would have different experiences looking for housing. • Housing discrimination probably happens, particularly to immigrants and people who are undocumented. There might be substandard housing that people put up with due to their immigration status. • Landlords may discriminate based on earnings. Households receiving public assistance may have their options limited because of landlords being unwilling to accept their applications. • Income is the biggest driving force in housing access and minorities are generally the poorest population groups in Fresno. They live predominately in South Fresno. • Discrimination is everywhere. Recent law around Section 8 will address landlord refusal to take vouchers. • Housing discrimination happens against the LGBTQ community. • Renters may experience discrimination based on family status, particularly large families. • For homeowners, households with the same means will have the same options; however, they may have different preferences in where to live. • Barriers to obtaining housing include: o Bad credit or no credit. There are a lot of unbanked people with no credit history. o Eviction history. o Race. o Immigrant status. Fresno has a lot of migrant farm workers, who may have more difficulty purchasing a home. o Language barriers, especially for Hmong families. Some places where Hmong live are poorly managed and in bad condition, but residents can’t advocate or voice problems to their landlords, so management does not respond to their needs. 4. Are people in Fresno segregated in where they live? What causes this segregation to occur? • Yes, Fresno is segregated by income/affordability and race. 18 • Yes, Fresno is segregated but similarly to any city in the US. • Yes, if you look at a map you see that the city is segregated, with white residents living predominately in North and Northwest Fresno. • California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) Opportunity Maps show that there are areas of the region that are more segregated than others. • Yes, the Black community is definitely segregated. • Yes, Southeast Fresno has a large Hispanic population, West Fresno has a large Black population, North Fresno and Clovis has a large white population, north and west of Highway 99 there are higher share of Sikh population, and Central Fresno has a mix of residents. • There is a larger Hmong population in SE Fresno. It could be due to where people were limited to purchasing. There are also populations living near their farms. SE Fresno is 20% Asian. • Large Indian population in West Fresno. Not only is there a lack of affordable housing in affluent areas, but there is also a lack of housing so that people can move up within their communities. • Tower District and Central Fresno may have a mix of residents, but overall, segregation is pretty clear on a census tract level. • There are concentrations of certain ethnicities throughout the city. Near parks that have cricket, most of residents are Sikh. • People with disabilities are segregated based on where they are able to find housing. • Poor residents live south, rich residents move further north. • The city is not segregated and talking about it as such amplifies the problem. • There is some racism in Fresno, but it’s not the biggest problem. • Causes of segregation: o Redlining early in Fresno’s history, particularly in Southeast Fresno. o NIMBYism. o Public housing locations – in southeast Fresno, there is public housing but not up north. o Near Fresno State, the area was more established and wealthier, but people who could afford to leave moved north. o The wealthy moved north up Van Ness over time and out to the bluffs. o The northside advocated for the highway not to be built in their area. This pushed the community apart based on the design. o Segregation persists because the poor cannot afford Clovis. People are poor because they aren’t working – and there are jobs out there. o There was a Hmong leader that came – Vang Pao – and people followed him here. 5. What types of fair housing services (education, complaint investigation, testing, etc.) are offered in the area? Who offers them? How well are they coordinated with the work of other organizations in the community? • Central California Legal Services was most commonly cited by interviewees. One person noted that CCLS coordinates well with other local agencies but could use additional support. • Other agencies identified by interviewees include: 19 o California Rural Legal Services o Fair Housing Council o Fresno Housing Authority o City of Fresno o Social justice advocacy law group o Tenants’ rights groups o Building Health Communities may offer workshops o California Apartment Association • Central Valley Regional Center advocates for clients with developmental disabilities and consults with attorneys regularly on legal issues. • The efficacy of the Fair Housing Council should be reviewed. The City has funded them for decades – what is it getting? • Even though there are fair housing resources here, the general public may not have much awareness about them. • Fair housing information needs to be disseminated through schools, churches, and in multiple languages. • A few interviewees did not know of any fair housing resources in Fresno. 6. Are public resources (e.g. parks, schools, roads, police & fire services, etc.) available evenly throughout all neighborhoods in the city? Do some areas get more/less than their share? Parks • Park quality varies. Southwest Fresno parks have older equipment and less maintenance, but possibly more programming. • There is only one community center off of Blackstone. • Look at differences in park space north and south of Herndon – it’s not equitable at all. There are more parks in some districts than others. • Southwest Fresno has lots of heavy truck traffic and no parks. • The City tries to invest equitably. New neighborhoods have parks because they were planned that way; to increase the number of parks in older neighborhoods that were built without them, you’d have to tear down houses. Poor planning in the past leads to inequities. Schools • There is an earnest effort to provide quality schools throughout the city, although student achievement is not the same citywide. • There are significant differences in schools between North and South Fresno (or between Clovis and Fresno school districts). Tax dollars from North Fresno should be used to improve South Fresno schools. Fire and Police • Police resources are allocated based on data; fire department resources are designed to serve all parts of the city equally. • Core of city is well represented with police but may not be as good on the edge. 20 • There are some challenges with fire services. They need a fire station on the outlying areas that are converting from rural to urban. Transportation and Lighting • Bike lanes, trails and sidewalks are more present in newer areas. • Street lighting is more prominent in newer areas. • Street conditions (medians, paving, sidewalks, landscaping) vary considerably by neighborhood, with North Fresno generally being in better condition than South Fresno. • Public transit service is concentrated in South Fresno with less accessibility in the north; this creates a disconnect. • There is industry in the south, but no bus transportation. Those jobs are only for people with cars. General Comments • Yes, the city does a good job of spreading resources out to its districts. • Historically, the City has focused investment on the north side at the expense of the south side. The current administration is trying to right those past wrongs. • South Fresno has many resources/services, which may be difficult to access if you don’t live there. • The differences between the north and south sides of the city have less to do with infrastructure and more to do with economic development. Higher incomes in the north attract more businesses. • Higher income areas are newer and better built compared to older, more deteriorated areas. • Areas with a greater tax base generally have better infrastructure. This is visible just driving from North to South Fresno. 7. Is there anything we haven’t discussed that you feel is important to our research? • Reach out to those who have no voice. Everyone contributes equally to Fresno. The city is very diverse, and that needs to be embraced. The GoFresno app should be marketed more evenly. • Landlords have a lot of political muscle in Fresno and no one wants to do anything to upset them. Eviction is part of their business model. • Residents need to better understand why the community should work to end homelessness. There is no organization focused on communicating this. • Different residential models should be explored to improve housing affordability and homeownership access – land trusts, first time homebuyers programs, rent control, partnership with the Housing Authority. • Fresno is always chasing a big new project that will never come to be. Why not set more realistic goals? A small pocket park could be built easily and inexpensively. 21 Community Survey The community survey queried residents and other stakeholders regarding needs related to housing, homelessness, economic/community development, public infrastructure, public facilities, and public services. Respondent Demographics • 92% of respondents lived in the City of Fresno. • Residents from 26 zip codes across the region participated in the survey. All City of Fresno zip codes were represented among the respondents, with the largest numbers of respondents coming from the 93702 (Roosevelt High School vicinity), 93727 (Las Palmas/Sunnyside), 93704 (Maroa Avenue corridor from Herndon to McKinley), and 93726 (Einstein Park area, south of Fresno State) ZIP codes. • Survey participants were predominantly white (44%) and Hispanic (33%) but reflected all racial and ethnic backgrounds in the city. • Survey respondents represented all age groups and income levels • Over one quarter of all survey participants lived in households that were bilingual or included a resident with a disability. • Nearly half of all survey respondents were homeowners (46%), while 42% were renters. • Eleven percent of respondents lived in publicly supported housing. FIGURE 2. AGE GROUP AND ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME OF SURVEY RESPONDENTS 18-24 11% 25-34 22% 35-44 22% 45-54 19% 55-61 10% 62-74 13% 75+ 3% Which is your age group? 73 53 69 57 81 106 $100,000 and above $75,000 to $99,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $25,000 to $34,999 Less than $25,000 0 50 100 150 Number of Participants What is your total annual household income? 22 Fair Housing in Fresno • A majority of Fresno’s survey participants report knowing or somewhat knowing their fair housing rights (63% and 30%, respectively). While only 7% of respondents do not know their fair housing rights, 38% of respondents would not know where to file a fair housing complaint. • Ninety-one (91) survey participants experienced housing discrimination while living in Fresno. Most of these participants (79%) stated that they were discriminated against by a landlord or property manager. Race, ethnicity and familial status were the most common bases for discrimination. • Of the 91 respondents who experienced housing discrimination, only 17 filed a report. The most common reasons for not reporting discrimination were (1) not knowing what good it would do, (2) fear of retaliation, and (3) not knowing where to file. • Survey participants also expressed that community resources such as roads, sidewalks, parks, grocery stores, buses, banks, schools and general property maintenance were not provided equally nor maintained equally throughout all neighborhoods in the city. FIGURE 3. AVAILABILITY AND MAINTENANCE OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES IN FRESNO FROM THE COMMUNITY SURVEY • Survey participants were asked whether they thought housing discrimination was an issue in Fresno. One-half of all participants believed housing discrimination was an issue. 134 109 75 99 100 56 56 94 147 52 107 117 50 56 181 188 216 235 232 272 241 251 169 308 201 171 282 285 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Schools Bus Service Roads and Sidewalks Grocery stores and other shopping Banking and lending Parks and trails Property maintenanceNumber of Survey ResponsesThinking about community resources in Fresno, please check whether you think each of the following are equally available and maintained in all neighborhoods. Equally provided Equally maintained Not equally provided Not equally maintained 23 FIGURE 4. HOUSING DISCRIMINATION IN FRESNO FROM THE COMMUNITY SURVEY Yes 50% No 13% mewhat 23% I don't know 14% Do you believe housing discrimination is an issue in Fresno? So • Asked to select any factors that are barriers to fair housing in Fresno, respondents most commonly identified the following: o Not enough affordable housing for individuals o Not enough affordable housing for families o Neighborhoods that need revitalization and new investment o Not enough affordable housing for seniors 24 FIGURE 5. FAIR HOUSING BARRIERS IN FRESNO 150 152 161 162 180 207 231 246 250 258 276 281 282 307 321 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Limited access to banking and financial services Discrimination or steering by real estate agents Discrimination by mortgage lenders Limited access to community resources for people with disabilities Limited access to good schools Lack of housing options for people with disabilities Limited access to jobs Landlords refusing to accept rental assistance Community opposition to affordable housing Discrimination by landlords or rental agents Displacement of residents due to rising housing costs Not enough affordable housing for seniors Neighborhoods that need revitalization and new investment Not enough affordable housing for families Not enough affordable housing for individuals Number of Survey RespondentsFair Housing Barrier 25 CHAPTER 3. SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE Demographic Profile Fresno’s population is estimated at 510,450 according to the 2011-2015 5-Year American Community Survey. Between 2009 and 2015, the population increased by 9%, up from 467,089 in 2009. Race and Ethnicity Fresno’s Hispanic population constitutes nearly half of all residents (46.7%) and has grown significantly since the 1990 Census, where the Hispanic population only made up around 30% of the population. In real numbers, the Hispanic population increased from 107,403 people to 231,855 over the 20-year timeframe, a 115.9% increase. Conversely, the percentage of the city’s white population has decreased over the same period, from 184,346 people (50.6% of the city) in 1990 to 152,909 (30.8%) in 2010. HISPANIC RESIDENTS MAKE UP THE LARGEST SHARE OF FRESNO’S POPULATION, GROWING FROM UNDER 30% IN 1990 TO NEARLY 50% TODAY. Asian or Pacific Islanders comprise Fresno’s third largest population segment, making up 12.1% of the city, roughly similar to their 1990 population share of 11.4%. From 1990 to 2010, Fresno gained an additional 18,500 Asian or Pacific Islander residents, an increase of 44.2%. Black residents (36,724 people or 7.4% of Fresno’s population) and Native American residents (3,157 people or 0.6%) saw no change in population share since 1990. These segments added 9,600 and 517 residents since, respectively, since 1990. Trends in the Fresno region (defined by HUD as Fresno County for the purpose of this AI) are similar to those in the City of Fresno. Between 1990 and 2010, the Hispanic population grew to over half of the population (50.3% or 468,070 residents), up from 35.4% (236,234 residents) in 1990. Comparatively, the white population decreased from 50.7% (338,298 residents) to 32.7% (304,522 residents) over the same period. The Fresno region gained 40,000 Asian residents, nearly 19,000 Black residents, and nearly 6,000 Native American residents; however, these groups make up a smaller share of the region than in the City of Fresno. The region’s 87,922 Asian or Pacific Islander residents make up 9.5% of the region (compared to 12.1% of the city). The region’s 45,005 Black residents make up 4.8% of the region, compared to 7.4% of the city. National Origin The City of Fresno’s foreign-born residents make up 20.5% of the city’s population (101,517 residents). This number represents an increase from 60,988 foreign-born residents in 1990, which made up 16.7% of the population. The city’s increase in foreign-born residents parallels the rate of foreign-born residents in the region, where 21.2% are foreign born compared to 17.8% in 1990. The top three countries of origin in both the city and the Fresno region are Mexico, Laos and India. Residents born in Mexico make up 64% of all foreign-born Fresno (city) residents. Residents from 26 Laos make up another 11% of the city’s foreign-born population, while residents from India make up 7%. Other significant countries of origin include Thailand, the Philippines, Cambodia, El Salvador, Vietnam, Korea and China (excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan). Limited English Proficiency The limited English proficiency (LEP) population makes up approximately one-sixth of Fresno residents (79,621 residents). While the number of LEP residents increased overall from 1990 to 2010, in the year 2000 the city had a higher percentage of residents with limited English proficiency (17.6%) than in 2010. The greater Fresno region also experienced growth in the LEP population, increasing from 109,640 in 1990 (16.4% of the population) to 157,195 in 2010 (or 16.9% of the population). The top languages spoken by the LEP population include Spanish, Hmong, Other Indic languages, and Laotian. Spanish-speaking LEP residents comprise 70% of the LEP population. Hmong-speaking LEP residents make up 12% of the LEP population, with all other languages accounting for no more than 4% of the LEP population. Disability According to 2011-2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates, 13% of Fresno’s population has a disability. The most common disability type in the city is an ambulatory difficulty, which affects 7.1% of the population. Cognitive and independent living difficulties are the next most prevalent, affecting 5.8% and 5.4% of the population. Smaller percentages of the population are affected by hearing difficulties (3.7%), vision difficulties (3.2%), and self-care difficulties (3.0%). The distribution pattern by disability type in the city is similar to that of the region, with ambulatory difficulties being the most prevalent disability type (affecting 6.7% of the regional population). Age The age distribution in Fresno reflects an aging of the population from 1990 to present. During this period, the share of the population under 18 decreased to 29.9%, down from 31.4% in 1990 and 33.4% in 2000. Conversely, the share of adults aged 18-64 grew from 58.4% in 1990 (and 57.1% in 2000) to 60.5% by 2010. The share of seniors declined slightly, from 10.2% in 1990 to 9.7% in 2010. The Fresno region experienced a nearly identical pattern, with a greater share of adults aged 18-64, a smaller share of children and a slightly declining share of seniors since 1990. Sex Gender distribution in Fresno has shifted between 1990 and 2010 to reflect a smaller female to male ratio over time. The male population increased to 49.2% in 2010 from 48.6% in 1990. Fresno’s female population decreased from 51.4% in 1990 to 50.8% in 2010. Gender distribution in the region is evenly split between male and female (each at 50%) in 2010. Family Type Families with children account for 53.0% of all families residing in Fresno. Although the city added over 10,000 families with children by 2010 (climbing to 59,626 households), the overall share of families with children declined by 2.3 percentage points between the period of 1990 to 2010. A 27 similar decline occurred at the regional level, where families with children decreased from 54.6% of households in 1990 to 52.3% in 2010, despite gaining over 20,000 additional families with children. These shifts represent a decrease in the percentage of families with children in combination with an increase in the number of families overall. 28 TABLE 1. DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW Demographic Indicator City of Fresno Fresno Region # % # % Race/Ethnicity Non-Hispanic White 152,909 30.8% 304,522 32.7% Black 36,724 7.4% 45,005 4.8% Asian or Pacific Islander 60,180 12.1% 87,922 9.5% Native American 3,157 0.6% 5,979 0.6% Two or More Races 10,328 0.6% 17,208 0.6% Other 960 0.2% 1,744 0.2% Hispanic 231,855 46.7% 468,070 50.3% National Origin #1 country of origin Mexico 57,562 12.6% Mexico 131,346 15.3% #2 country of origin Laos 9,625 2.1% Laos 11,420 1.3% #3 country of origin India 6,630 1.5% India 11,270 1.3% #4 country of origin Thailand 4,498 1.0% Philippines 6,293 0.7% #5 country of origin Philippines 3,925 0.9% El Salvador 5,768 0.7% #6 country of origin Cambodia 1,730 0.4% Thailand 5,490 0.6% #7 country of origin El Salvador 1,726 0.4% Vietnam 2,553 0.3% #8 country of origin Vietnam 1,661 0.4% China* 2,195 0.3% #9 country of origin Korea 1,290 0.3% Cambodia 2,160 0.3% #10 country of origin China* 1,264 0.3% Korea 1,890 0.2% Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Language #1 LEP Language Spanish 55,085 12.1% Spanish 129,262 15.0% #2 LEP Language Hmong 9,124 2.0% Hmong 10,918 1.3% #3 LEP Language Other Indic language 3,522 0.8% Other Indic language 5,906 0.7% #4 LEP Language Laotian 3,094 0.7% Laotian 3,399 0.4% * Excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan. 29 TABLE 1. DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW (CONTINUED) Demographic Indicator City of Fresno Fresno Region # % # % Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Language (continued) #5 LEP Language Cambodian 1,720 0.4% Chinese 2,666 0.3% #6 LEP Language Chinese 1,668 0.4% Cambodian 2,086 0.2% #7 LEP Language Armenian 1,099 0.2% Vietnamese 1,789 0.2% #8 LEP Language Vietnamese 1,097 0.2% Tagalog 1,439 0.2% #9 LEP Language Tagalog 944 0.2% Armenian 1,408 0.2% #10 LEP Language Arabic 930 0.2% Arabic 1,312 0.2% Disability Type Hearing difficulty 16,712 3.7% 31,270 3.7% Vision difficulty 14,563 3.2% 23,661 2.8% Cognitive difficulty 26,383 5.8% 42,299 5.0% Ambulatory difficulty 16,712 7.1% 57,130 6.7% Self-care difficulty 13,707 3.0% 23,733 2.8% Independent living difficulty 24,354 5.4% 41,042 4.8% Sex Male 244,275 49.2% 464,811 50.0% Female 251,838 50.8% 465,639 50.0% Age Under 18 148,098 29.9% 277,507 29.8% 18-64 300,017 60.5% 559,522 60.1% 65+ 47,998 9.7% 93,421 10.0% Family Type Families with children 59,626 53.0% 112,139 52.3% Note: All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region, except family type, which is out of total families. The most populous places of birth and languages at the city and county levels may not be the same and are thus labeled separately. Data Sources: Decennial Census; ACS 30 TABLE 2. DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS Demographic Indicator 1990 2000 2010 # % # % # % City of Fresno Race/Ethnicity White, Non-Hispanic 184,346 50.6% 167,709 38.4% 152,909 30.8% Black, Non-Hispanic 27,124 7.4% 36,168 8.3% 40,297 8.1% Hispanic 107,403 29.5% 172,038 39.4% 231,855 46.7% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 41,733 11.4% 51,931 11.9% 64,252 13.0% Native American, Non-Hispanic 2,640 0.7% 5,843 1.3% 5,523 1.1% National Origin Foreign-born 60,988 16.7% 87,136 19.9% 101,517 20.5% Limited English Proficiency Limited English proficiency 55,137 15.1% 76,847 17.6% 79,621 16.1% Sex Male 177,080 48.6% 214,312 49.0% 244,275 49.2% Female 187,614 51.4% 223,089 51.0% 251,838 50.8% Age Under 18 114,587 31.4% 146,024 33.4% 148,098 29.9% 18-64 212,824 58.4% 249,736 57.1% 300,017 60.5% 65+ 37,284 10.2% 41,641 9.5% 47,998 9.7% Family Type Families with children 48,789 55.3% 44,690 56.4% 59,626 53.0% Fresno Region Race/Ethnicity White, Non-Hispanic 338,298 50.7% 317,277 39.7% 304,522 32.7% Black, Non-Hispanic 31,207 4.7% 43,399 5.4% 50,062 5.4% Hispanic 236,234 35.4% 351,211 44.0% 468,070 50.3% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 54,014 8.1% 70,140 8.8% 94,855 10.2% Native American, Non-Hispanic 4,979 0.8% 10,682 1.3% 10,612 1.1% National Origin Foreign-born 118,908 17.8% 168,501 21.1% 197,495 21.2% Limited English Proficiency Limited English proficiency 109,640 16.4% 151,468 19.0% 157,195 16.9% Sex Male 329,274 49.4% 398,846 49.9% 464,811 50.0% Female 337,722 50.6% 399,956 50.1% 465,639 50.0% 31 TABLE 2. DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS (CONTINUED) Demographic Indicator 1990 2000 2010 # % # % # % Fresno Region (continued) Age Under 18 208,942 31.3% 262,604 32.9% 277,507 29.8% 18-64 389,781 58.4% 457,232 57.2% 559,522 60.1% 65+ 68,273 10.2% 78,965 9.9% 93,421 10.0% Family Type Families with children 89,339 54.6% 79,423 55.8% 112,139 52.3% Note: All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region for that year, except family type, which is out of total families. Data Sources: Decennial Census; ACS Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty This study uses a methodology developed by HUD that combines demographic and economic indicators to identify racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (RECAPs). These areas are defined as census tracts that have an individual poverty rate of 40% or more (or an individual poverty rate that is at least 3 times that of the tract average for the metropolitan area, whichever is lower) and a non-white population of 50% or more. Using a metric that combines demographic and economic indicators helps to identify a jurisdictions’ most vulnerable communities. The racial and ethnic composition of neighborhoods with concentrations of poverty is disproportionate relative to the U.S. population overall. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Black and Hispanic populations comprise nearly 80% of the population living in areas of concentrated poverty in metropolitan areas, but only account for 42.6% of the total poverty population in the U.S.4 Overrepresentation of these groups in areas of concentrated poverty can exacerbate disparities related to safety, employment, access to jobs and quality education, and conditions that lead to poor health. Identification of RECAPs is significant in determining priority areas for reinvestment and services to ameliorate conditions that negatively impact RECAP residents and the larger region. Since 2000, the prevalence of concentrated poverty has expanded by nearly 75% in both population and number of neighborhoods. The majority of concentration of poverty is within the largest metro areas, but suburban regions have experienced the fastest growth rate.5 4 United States, Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. “Overview of Community Characteristics in Areas with Concentrated Poverty.” ASPE Issue Brief, May 2014, https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/pdf/40651/rb_concentratedpoverty.pdf. 5 Kneebone, Elizabeth. "The Growth and Spread of Concentrated Poverty, 2000 to 2008-2012." The Brookings Institution, 29 July 2016, www.brookings.edu/interactives/the-growth-and-spread-of-concentrated-poverty-2000-to- 2008-2012/. 32 There are currently 40 census tracts that are designated as RECAPs in the City of Fresno, a significant increase from the 26 RECAPs in 2000 and 16 in 1990. RECAP census tracts cover all downtown neighborhoods, such as Jane Addams, Edison, Lowell, and Jefferson, as well as west and south Fresno. There are also two RECAP census tracts in the Bullard neighborhood of northern Fresno, in or near the campus of Fresno State University. A third isolated RECAP in the Bullard neighborhood is located around Yosemite Freeway, between Bullard and Shaw Avenues. Approximately 32% of Fresnans (157,749 residents) live in RECAPS census tracts. Hispanic residents make up approximately 63% of the population living in RECAP tracts. White residents make up 14% of RECAP tract residents, followed by Asian residents (12%), Black residents (9.2%) and Native American and Other Non-Hispanic residents at less than 1%. Comparatively, the Hispanic share of RECAP tract residents is slightly higher in the region (68%) with all other groups making up smaller shares than in the city. The foreign-born population living in RECAP census tracts primarily originates from Mexico, with 20% (or 32,051) of the city’s RECAP census tract residents being born in that country. Similarly, 23.4% of all RECAP tract residents in the Fresno region were born in Mexico. Both the city and region also have a significant number of RECAP residents born in Laos (2.8% and 2.3% respectively). The third most common country of origin for RECAP tract residents in the city is Thailand, which makes up 1.5% of all RECAP residents. The third most common country of origin in the region is El Salvador, which is the birthplace of 1.3% of all RECAP residents. Looking at familial status, 61% of the families living in Fresno’s RECAP tracts have children. Sixty- one percent of families in the region’s RECAP tracts are also families with children. These figures indicate that the percentage of families with children is greater in RECAP areas than throughout the city and county in general, where the share of families with children is between 52-53%. 33 FIGURE 6. RACIALLY/ ETHNICALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS OF POVERTY, CITY OF FRESNO FIGURE 7. RACIALLY/ ETHNICALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS OF POVERTY AND RACE AND ETHNICITY, CITY OF FRESNO, 2010 34 TABLE 3. RACIALLY AND ETHNICALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS OF POVERTY Demographic Indicator City of Fresno RECAP Tracts Fresno Region RECAP Tracts # % # % Race/Ethnicity Total Population in RECAPs 157,749 - 204,786 - White, Non-Hispanic 21,555 13.7% 25,230 12.3% Black or African American, Non- Hispanic 14,527 9.2% 15,117 7.4% Hispanic 99,041 62.8% 139,825 68.3% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 18,960 12.0% 20,412 10.0% Native American, Non-Hispanic 1,073 0.7% 1,258 0.6% Other, Non-Hispanic 246 0.2% 321 0.2% National Origin Total Population in RECAPs 157,749 - 204,786 - #1 country of origin Mexico 32,051 20.3% Mexico 47,825 23.4% #2 country of origin Laos 4,435 2.8% Laos 4,661 2.3% #3 country of origin Thailand 2,313 1.5% El Salvador 2,613 1.3% Family Type Total Families in RECAPs 31,269 - 40,948 - Families with Children 19,069 61.0% 25,149 61.4% Data Sources: Decennial Census; ACS 35 CHAPTER 4. SEGREGATION AND INTEGRATION Communities experience varying levels of segregation between different racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups. High levels of residential segregation often lead to conditions that exacerbate inequalities among population groups within a community. Increased concentrations of poverty and unequal access to jobs, education, and other services are some of the consequences of high residential segregation.6 Federal housing policies and discriminatory mortgage lending practices prior to the Fair Housing Act of 1968 not only encouraged segregation, but mandated restrictions based on race in specific neighborhoods. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 outlawed discriminatory housing practices but did little to address the existing segregation and inequalities. The federal government implemented other housing policies and programs, such as Section 8 and HOPE VI, in an effort to ameliorate the negative effects of residential segregation and reduce concentrations of poverty. Despite these efforts, the repercussions of the discriminatory policies and practices continue to have a significant impact on residential patterns today. Race and Ethnicity While Fresno’s population is relatively evenly distributed throughout the city, the spatial distribution of the population indicates considerable levels of segregation by race and ethnicity. Maps of the city’s population by race and ethnicity indicate clustering of white, non-Hispanic residents in north Fresno and of Hispanic residents in the southern portion of the city. Populations of other races and ethnicities, including Black and Asian or Pacific Islander residents (non-Hispanic) are relatively evenly distributed throughout the city (see Figure 8). RACIAL AND ETHNIC SEGREGATION LEVELS IN FRESNO ARE CLASSIFIED AS LOW TO MODERATE AND HAVE BEEN DECLINING SINCE THE 1990S. Shifts in residential patterns of racial and ethnic groups since 1990 have resulted in a more diverse population in Fresno, but the city remains segregated by race and ethnicity. Figures 7 through 9 show an increase in the overall population -- and non-white populations in particular – between 1990 and 2010. Although it is difficult to determine exact correlation between density and segregation levels from the spatial data provided, segregation among racial and ethnic groups decreased slightly as density increased in the city between 1990 and 2010 (see Figures 8-10). 6 Massey, D. (1990). American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. American Journal of Sociology, 96(2), 329-357. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2781105 36 FIGURE 8. POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO, 2010 37 FIGURE 9. POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO, 2000 38 FIGURE 10. POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO, 1990 39 FIGURE 11. POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE FRESNO REGION, 2010 40 FIGURE 12. POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE FRESNO REGION, 2000 41 FIGURE 13. POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE FRESNO REGION, 1990 42 Segregation Levels In addition to visualizing the racial and ethnic composition of the area with the preceding maps, this study also uses a statistical analysis – referred to as dissimilarity – to evaluate how residential patterns vary by race and ethnicity, and how these patterns have changed since 1990. The Dissimilarity Index (DI) indicates the degree to two groups living in a region are similarly geographically distributed. Segregation is lowest when the geographic patterns of each group are the same. For example, segregation between two groups in a city or county is minimized when the population distribution by census tract of the first group matches that of the second. Segregation is highest when no members of the two groups occupy a common census tract. The proportion of the minority population group can be small and still not segregated if evenly spread among tracts or block groups. Evenness is not measured in an absolute sense but is scaled relative to the other group. Dissimilarity Index values range from 0 (complete integration) to 100 (complete segregation). HUD identifies a DI value below 40 as low segregation, a value between 40 and 54 as moderate segregation, and a value of 55 or higher as high segregation. When calculated from population data broken down by race or ethnicity, the DI represents the proportion of one group that would have to change their area of residence to match the distribution of the other. Table 4 shares the dissimilarity indices for four pairings, presenting values for 1990, 2000, and 2010, all calculated using census tracts as the area of measurement. The 2010 dissimilarity indices calculated for each pairing show low to moderate levels of segregation in the city of Fresno. The highest DI value of 42.0 was calculated for the Hispanic/white pairing, a slight decrease from moderate-level values calculated for 1990 and 2000. The Hispanic and white populations are also the most visibly segregated in Figures 8 through 10 in the previous section. The Asian or Pacific Islander/white pairing resulted in the lowest DI value of 35.8, indicating low levels of segregation among these populations. Between 1990 and 2010, DI values for all pairings decreased, with the Asian or Pacific Islander/white and Black/white pairings experiencing the greatest decreases. Only slight decreases in segregation levels occurred among the Hispanic and white populations during the same time period. The maps in the previous section show that the white population is clustered in north Fresno, while the city’s Hispanic population resides predominantly in south and west Fresno. As meeting attendees, survey respondents, and stakeholders interviewed in the course of this planning process noted that south and west Fresno have greater needs for public facilities and improvements compared to other areas of the city, the clustering of the Hispanic population in these areas may present fair housing concerns regarding disparities in access to opportunity by race and ethnicity. DI values in the Fresno region are higher compared to those in the city of Fresno for all pairings except for the Asian or Pacific Islander/ white pairing. In the region, DI values for non-white/ white, Black/white, and Hispanic/white pairings fall above the threshold for moderate segregation, while the Asian or Pacific Islander/ white pairing falls under the threshold for low segregation. The Black/white pairing has the highest DI of 49.5, and the Asian or Pacific Islander/white pairing has the lowest DI of 35.3. Segregation levels have decreased for pairings in the region since 1990. 43 TABLE 4. RACIAL AND ETHNIC DISSIMILARITY TRENDS Race/Ethnicity City of Fresno Fresno Region 1990 2000 2010 1990 2000 2010 Non-White/White 43.9 39.7 38.8 44.5 42.7 41.7 Black/White 52.1 42.4 41.3 52.6 51.7 49.5 Hispanic/White 43.2 42.3 42.0 47.8 46.9 46.5 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 48.9 36.9 35.8 43.5 36.1 35.3 Data Sources: Decennial Census National Origin and Limited English Proficiency Population Settlement patterns of immigrants significantly impact the composition and landscape of communities across the United States. Large central cities have the largest population of foreign- born residents, but suburban areas are experiencing rapid growth of foreign-born populations recently.7 Clusters of immigrants of the same ethnicity form for a variety of reasons. Social capital in the form of kinship ties, social network connections, and shared cultural experiences often draw new immigrants to existing communities. Settling in neighborhoods with an abundance of social capital is less financially burdensome for immigrants and provides opportunities to accumulate financial capital through employment and other resources that would otherwise be unattainable.8 Populations with limited English proficiency (LEP) are typically composed of foreign-born residents that originate from countries where English is not the primary language, however, a substantial portion (19%) of the national LEP population is born in the United States. Nationally, the LEP population has lower levels of education and is more likely to live in poverty compared to the English proficient population.9 Recent studies have also found that areas with high concentrations of LEP residents have lower rates of homeownership.10 Communities of people sharing the same ethnicity and informal networks are able to provide some resources and opportunities, but numerous barriers and limited financial capital influence residential patterns of foreign-born and LEP populations. Residential patterns of foreign-born residents in Fresno show some spatial clustering of residents by neighborhood. Residents from Mexico, India, the Philippines, Laos, and Thailand (including Hmong residents) represent the largest foreign-born populations. Mexican and Hmong residents 7 James, F., Romine, J., & Zwanzig, P. (1998). The Effects of Immigration on Urban Communities. Cityscape, 3(3), 171-192. 8 Massey, D. (1999). Why Does Immigration Occur?: A Theoretical Synthesis. In Hirschman C., Kasinitz P., & DeWind J. (Eds.), Handbook of International Migration, The: The American Experience (pp. 34-52). Russell Sage Foundation. 9 Zong, J. & Batalova, J. (2015). “The Limited English Proficient Population in the United States” Migration Information Source. Retrieved: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/limited-english-proficient-population-united-states 10 Golding, E., Goodman, L., & Strochack, S. (2018). “Is Limited English Proficiency a Barrier to Homeownership.” Urban Institute. Retrieved: https://www.urban.org/research/publication/limited-english-proficiency-barrier- homeownership 44 tend to reside in the southeastern portion of the city, while residents from India are clustered in northeastern Fresno (see Figure 14). The geographic distribution of residents with limited English proficiency (LEP) closely resembles patterns of the foreign-born population. The most common languages of LEP populations are Spanish, Hmong, other Indic languages, Laotian, and Cambodian. The most visible clustering of LEP residents is of the Spanish- and Hmong-speaking populations in south Fresno. (see Figure 14). Meeting attendees, interviewees, and survey respondents emphasized a need for increased investment in south and west Fresno. The clustering of foreign-born residents and LEP populations in geographic areas of Fresno that may have less access to public improvements points to potential fair housing concerns and a need for continued investment in public improvements in south and west Fresno. At the regional level, there is a large population of foreign-born residents from Mexico and a large Spanish-speaking population (see Figures 16 and 17). FIGURE 14. FOREIGN-BORN POPULATION BY NATIONALITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 45 FIGURE 15. POPULATION WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 46 FIGURE 16. FOREIGN-BORN POPULATION BY NATIONALITY IN THE FRESNO REGION 47 FIGURE 17. POPULATION WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY IN THE FRESNO REGION 48 CHAPTER 5. ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY Housing discrimination and residential segregation have limited access to opportunity for specific population groups and communities. It is important to understand opportunity, as used in this context, as a subjective quality. Typically, the term refers to access to resources like employment, quality education, healthcare, childcare, and other services that allow individuals and communities to achieve a high quality of life. However, research on this subject has found perceptions of opportunity follow similar themes but are prioritized differently by different groups. Racial and ethnic minorities, low-income groups, and residents of distressed neighborhoods identified job access, employment, and training as important opportunities while White residents, higher income groups, and residents of wealthier neighborhoods more often identified sense of community, social connections among neighbors, freedom of choice, education, and retirement savings.11 Proximity is often used to indicate levels of access to opportunity; however, it would be remiss to consider proximity as the only factor in determining level of access. Access to opportunity is also influenced by social, economic, and cultural factors, thus making it difficult to accurately identify and measure. HUD conducted research regarding Moving to Opportunity for Fair Housing (MTO) to understand the impact of increased access to opportunity. Researchers found residents who moved to lower-poverty neighborhoods experienced safer neighborhoods and better health outcomes, but there was no significant change in educational outcomes, employment, or income.12 However, recent studies show the long-term effects of MTO on the educational attainment of children who were under the age of 13 are overwhelmingly positive with improved college attendance rates and higher incomes. On the other hand, children who were over the age of 13 show negative long-term impacts from MTO.13 The strategy to improve access to opportunities has been two-pronged with different housing and community development programs. Tenant-based housing vouchers allow mobility of recipients to locate in lower-poverty areas while programs like the Community Development Block Grant and Choice Neighborhoods Initiative provide funds to increase opportunities in disadvantaged neighborhoods. 11 Lung-Amam, Willow S., et al. "Opportunity for Whom? The Diverse Definitions of Neighborhood Opportunity in Baltimore." City and Community, vol. 17, no. 3, 27 Sept. 2018, pp. 636-657, doi:10.1111/cico.12318. 12 Moving to Opportunity for Fair Housing Demonstration Program: Final Impacts Evaluation. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, www.huduser.gov/portal//publications/pdf/MTOFHD_fullreport_v2.pdf. 13 Chetty, Raj, Nathaniel Hendren, and Lawrence F. Katz. 2016. "The Effects of Exposure to Better Neighborhoods on Children: New Evidence from the Moving to Opportunity Experiment." American Economic Review, 106 (4): 855- 902. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/hendren/files/mto_paper.pdf 49 Overview of HUD-Defined Opportunity Factors Among the many factors that drive housing choice for individuals and families are neighborhood factors including access to quality schools, jobs, and transit. To measure economic and educational conditions at a neighborhood level, HUD developed a methodology to quantify the degree to which a neighborhood provides such opportunities. For each block group in the U.S., HUD provides a score on several “opportunity dimensions,” including school proficiency, poverty, labor market engagement, jobs proximity, transportation costs, transit trips, and environmental health. For each block group, a value is calculated for each index and results are then standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking within the metro area, state, or nation. For each opportunity dimension, a higher index score indicates more favorable neighborhood characteristics. Average index values by race and ethnicity for the city and region are provided in Table 5 for the total population and the population living below the federal poverty line. These values can be used to assess whether some population subgroups tend to live in higher opportunity areas than others and will be discussed in more detail by opportunity dimension throughout the remainder of this chapter. The Opportunity Index Disparity measures the difference between the scores for the white non-Hispanic group and other groups. A negative score indicates that the particular subgroup has a lower score on that dimension than the white non-Hispanic group. A positive score indicates that the subgroup has a higher score than the white non-Hispanic Group. Figures 18 through 28 map each of the opportunity dimensions along with demographic information such as race and ethnicity. 50 TABLE 5. DISPARITY IN ACCESS TO NEIGHBORHOOD OPPORTUNITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO AND THE FRESNO REGION Opportunity Dimension Race / Ethnicity Opportunity Index Disparity between White Non-Hispanic Population and Other Groups Non-Hispanic Hispanic White Black Asian or Pacific Islander Native American Black Asian Native American Hispanic City of Fresno – Total Population School Proficiency Index 59.9 35.5 45.3 41.3 34.6 -24.4 -14.5 -18.6 -25.3 Jobs Proximity Index 48.6 48.9 43.7 47.9 46.4 0.3 -4.8 -0.6 -2.2 Labor Market Index 43.7 20.8 28.7 25.0 20.4 -22.9 -15.0 -18.8 -23.4 Transit Index 58.0 63.7 60.0 62.1 63.5 5.8 2.0 4.2 5.6 Low Transportation Cost Index 36.5 42.2 37.0 41.2 42.0 5.7 0.5 4.7 5.5 Low Poverty Index 45.5 20.9 30.2 24.4 19.5 -24.6 -15.3 -21.1 -26.0 Environmental Health Index 22.0 16.6 19.3 17.2 15.9 -5.4 -2.7 -4.9 -6.2 City of Fresno – Population below the Poverty Line School Proficiency Index 46.3 32.3 28.5 32.5 27.7 -14.0 -17.8 -13.8 -18.6 Jobs Proximity Index 50.1 49.0 44.3 46.2 48.4 -1.0 -5.8 -3.9 -1.7 Labor Market Index 27.4 13.7 14.4 15.8 12.9 -13.7 -13.0 -11.6 -14.5 Transit Index 63.0 66.6 64.3 64.7 66.1 3.6 1.3 1.7 3.1 Low Transportation Cost Index 43.3 45.5 42.8 44.7 45.4 2.2 -0.5 1.4 2.1 Low Poverty Index 26.0 12.3 12.7 15.4 9.7 -13.8 -13.3 -10.6 -16.3 Environmental Health Index 17.3 14.1 15.0 13.9 13.6 -3.2 -2.3 -3.4 -3.7 Data Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 51 TABLE 5. DISPARITY IN ACCESS TO NEIGHBORHOOD OPPORTUNITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO AND THE FRESNO REGION (CONTINUED) Opportunity Dimension Race / Ethnicity Opportunity Index Disparity between White Non-Hispanic Population and Other Groups Non-Hispanic Hispanic White Black Asian or Pacific Islander Native American Black Asian Native American Hispanic Fresno Region – Total Population School Proficiency Index 59.2 36.6 48.6 46.7 33.3 -22.6 -10.6 -12.5 -25.8 Jobs Proximity Index 47.0 48.2 43.3 46.9 48.2 1.2 -3.7 -0.1 1.2 Labor Market Index 43.3 21.9 32.4 28.5 21.9 -21.3 -10.9 -14.8 -21.3 Transit Index 50.9 61.9 55.6 51.9 56.3 11.0 4.7 1.0 5.3 Low Transportation Cost Index 28.8 40.1 32.2 31.5 31.7 11.3 3.4 2.7 2.9 Low Poverty Index 47.0 23.4 34.5 32.5 21.2 -23.6 -12.5 -14.5 -25.8 Environmental Health Index 31.5 21.0 23.9 31.3 30.5 -10.5 -7.6 -0.2 -1.0 Fresno Region – Population below the Poverty Line School Proficiency Index 46.7 31.7 32.2 37.9 27.1 -15.0 -14.6 -8.9 -19.6 Jobs Proximity Index 49.3 48.9 44.9 43.8 48.9 -0.5 -4.5 -5.6 -0.5 Labor Market Index 29.0 14.1 17.1 15.7 15.5 -14.9 -11.8 -13.3 -13.5 Transit Index 57.2 65.3 62.0 60.2 58.4 8.2 4.8 3.0 1.2 Low Transportation Cost Index 36.5 44.1 40.5 40.6 33.9 7.5 4.0 4.0 -2.7 Low Poverty Index 29.2 12.9 15.4 16.9 12.2 -16.2 -13.8 -12.2 -17.0 Environmental Health Index 24.8 15.7 16.9 25.2 30.7 -9.1 -7.9 0.4 5.9 Data Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 52 Education School proficiency is an indication of the quality of education that is available to residents of an area. High quality education is a vital community resource that can lead to more opportunities and improve quality of life. HUD’s school proficiency index is calculated based on the performance of 4th grade students on state reading and math exams. For each block group, the index is calculated using test results in up to the three closest schools within 1.5 miles. Results are then standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking within the state. A higher index score indicates greater access to high-performing elementary schools.14 SCHOOL PROFICIENCY INDEX: BASED ON 4TH GRADE STUDENT PERFORMANCE ON STATE READING AND MATH TESTS AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS IN OR NEAR EACH BLOCK GROUP Figure 18 shows HUD-provided opportunity scores related to education for block groups within the city of Fresno, along with the demographic indicators of race and ethnicity. In each map, lighter shading indicates areas of lower opportunity and darker shading indicates higher opportunity. Access to proficient schools among block groups varies significantly throughout the city. While block groups in north Fresno generally have high levels of access to proficient schools, those in south and west Fresno have very low levels of access (see Figure 18). Access to proficient schools also varies by race and ethnicity. Block groups in north Fresno, which have higher proportions of white residents, have the highest school proficiency index scores. School proficiency index scores are lowest in the southern and western portions of the city, areas in which Hispanic and Black/ African American residents are more likely to reside. The opportunity dimension scores in Table 5 also indicate disparities in access to proficient schools among racial and ethnic groups in Fresno. The greatest disparities exist between the white population, with a school proficiency index score of 59.9, and Hispanic and Black populations (with scores of 34.6 and 35.5, respectively). The populations below the federal poverty line experience greater disparities in levels of access to proficient schools, with Hispanic and Asian or Pacific Islander populations below the poverty line experiencing the lowest access to proficient schools. In the Fresno metro area, school proficiency index scores are lower for white and Hispanic populations and higher for other groups relative to scores in the city. Disparities among racial and ethnic groups are lower for all groups except the white and Hispanic populations. Population groups below the poverty line in the region have lower access to proficient schools, with Black and Hispanic populations below the poverty line experiencing the lowest levels of access in the region. 14 HUD’s data sources for its school proficiency index include attendance area zones from School Attendance Boundary Information System (SABINS) and Maponics, school proficiency data from Great Schools, and school addresses and attendance from Common Core of Data. For a more detailed description of HUD’s methodology and data sources, please see HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Data Documentation appended to this report. 53 Results from the survey conducted over the course of this planning process echoed these concerns surrounding disparate access to proficient schools, with 40 percent of survey respondents noting that schools in the city are not equally provided, compared to 30 percent stating that they are equally provided. FIGURE 18. SCHOOL PROFICIENCY INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 54 Employment Neighborhoods with jobs in close proximity are often assumed to have good access to jobs. However, distance alone does not capture any other factor such as transportation options, the type of jobs available in the area, or the education and training necessary to obtain them. There may be concentrations of jobs and low-income neighborhoods in urban centers, but many of the jobs may be unattainable for residents of low-income neighborhoods. Therefore, this section analyzes both the labor market engagement and jobs proximity indices, which together offer a better indication of job accessibility for residents of specific areas. The Jobs Proximity Index measures the physical distance between place of residence and job locations, with employment centers weighted more heavily. It also takes into account the local labor supply (i.e., competition for jobs) near such employment centers. Block group results are then standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking within the metro area. A higher index score indicates greater access to job locations.15 The Jobs Proximity Index scores of block groups in the city of Fresno are mapped in Figure 19 along with the population distribution by race and ethnicity. The Labor Market Engagement Index is based on unemployment rate, labor force participation rate, and the percent of the population age 25 and over with a bachelor’s degree or higher. Block group results are standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking nationally. A higher index score indicates greater labor market engagement.16 Figure 20 maps Labor Market Engagement Index scores for block groups in Fresno. Again, lighter shading indicates areas of lower opportunity and darker shading indicates higher opportunity. Mapping the Jobs Proximity Index shows that Fresno has moderate levels of jobs proximity and that block groups with high proximity to jobs are well-distributed across the city (see Figure 19). Mapping the Labor Market Engagement Index shows low levels of engagement with the labor market in most of the city’s block groups, with stark disparities in labor market engagement by area of the city (see Figure 20). While block groups in north Fresno display high levels of labor market engagement, the rest of the city has very low levels of engagement with the labor market, indicating high unemployment rates and low educational attainment. 15 HUD’s data source for its jobs proximity index includes the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) database. For a more detailed description of HUD’s methodology and data sources, please see HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Data Documentation appended to this report. 16 HUD’s data source for its labor market engagement index is the American Community Survey. For a more detailed description of HUD’s methodology and data sources, please see HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Data Documentation appended to this report. JOBS PROXIMITY INDEX: BASED ON DISTANCE TO REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT CENTERS AND THE LABOR SUPPLY SERVING THOSE CENTERS LABOR MARKET ENGAGEMENT INDEX: BASED ON EMPLOYMENT LEVELS, LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATES, AND EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT 55 FIGURE 19. JOBS PROXIMITY INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 56 FIGURE 20. LABOR MARKET INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Table 5 shows patterns for both Jobs Proximity and Labor Market Engagement across racial and ethnic groups. While proximity to jobs is similar across racial and ethnic groups in Fresno, significant disparities exist in labor market engagement. In particular, the white population has greater engagement with the labor market than all other racial and ethnic groups. Hispanic and Black populations experience the lowest levels of labor market engagement in the city. 57 The city’s population living below the poverty line generally has higher levels of jobs proximity compared to the population in the city as a whole but lower levels of labor market engagement, indicating inability to access jobs due to factors other than proximity. Interviews with stakeholders in the city indicate that these factors may include lack of access to transportation and mismatches between available jobs and worker education and skillsets. Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics data also show that a low proportion of residents both live and work in Fresno (see Table 6), indicating high levels of commuting outside of the city and that access to vehicles may present barriers for many residents in accessing employment. TABLE 6. INFLOW AND OUTFLOW OF WORKERS, CITY OF FRESNO, 2017 Inflow and Outflow of Workers Number Percent Living in the City of Fresno 194,549 100.0% Living in the City but Employed Outside of the City 84,704 43.5% Living and Employed in the City of Fresno 109,845 56.5% Employed in the City of Fresno 224,693 100.0% Employed in the City but Living Outside of the City 114,848 51.1% Employed and Living in the City of Fresno 109,845 48.9% Note: Data covers all of San Bernardino County and is not limited to the jurisdictions participating in the County’s CDBG program. Source: Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LODES) data, 2017 The long distances required to access employment for many workers may also be a cause of the relatively high unemployment levels in the city. Unemployment for the population 16 and older in Fresno was 11.1 percent in 2017 compared to 7.7 percent in the state of California overall. Within the Fresno metro area, jobs proximity levels are similar to those in the city, with little disparity across racial groups (see Table 5). Scores for labor market engagement in the metro are generally slightly higher than those in the city. In addition to jobs proximity and labor market engagement, household income is a good indicator of access to employment. Median household incomes tend to be low in south Fresno and high in north Fresno (see Figure 21). Variation in household income by census tract generally follows the spatial patterns of labor market engagement seen in Figure 20. In line with these findings regarding access to employment, survey respondents ranked incentives for job creation as the greatest economic and community development need in the city, with 59 percent of respondents rating them as a high need and 30 percent rating them as a moderate need. Employment training was rated as one of the top public service needs in the city, with 58 percent of respondents rating it as a high need and 30 percent rating it as a moderate need. 58 FIGURE 21. MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN THE CITY OF FRESNO In Fresno County, monthly costs for a family of two adults and one school-aged child, including housing, childcare, healthcare, food, transportation, and other miscellaneous costs, are estimated at $3,813 (or $45,756 annually).17 Yet, 23.1 percent of primary jobs held by Fresno residents pay $1,250 per month or less ($15,000 or less per year), and 44.2 percent of jobs pay between $1,251 and $3,333 (between $15,000 and $39,996 per year),18 indicating that a high proportion of the city’s residents do not make sufficient income to provide for basic needs. 17 Insight Center. (2018). Family Needs Calculator. Data from The Self Sufficiency Standard for California, 2018, Center for Women’s Welfare, University of Washington. Retrieved from: https://insightcced.org/2018-family-needs- calculator/ 18 Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics data. Home Area Profile Analysis. Retrieved from: https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/ 59 Transportation The Transit Trip Index measures how often low-income renter families in a neighborhood use public transit. Values are then standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking nationally. The higher the index value, the more likely residents in that neighborhood use public transit. The Low Transportation Cost Index is based on estimates of transportation costs as a percent of income for low- income renter families in a given neighborhood. Results are standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking nationally. The higher the Low Transportation Cost Index, the lower the cost of transportation in that neighborhood.19 Figures 22 and 23 map Transit Trip and Low Transportation Cost Index values for Fresno. Lighter shading indicates areas of lower opportunity (i.e., less transit use and higher transportation costs) and darker shading indicates higher opportunity (i.e., higher transit use and lower transportation costs). TRANSIT TRIP INDEX: BASED ON ESTIMATED NUMBER OF TRANSIT TRIPS TAKEN BY FAMILIES WITH INCOMES AT 50% OF MEDIAN INCOME FOR RENTERS IN THE REGION LOW TRANSPORTATION COST INDEX: BASED ON TRANSPORTATION COSTS AS A SHARE OF INCOME FOR FAMILIES WITH INCOMES AT 50% OF MEDIAN INCOME FOR RETNERS IN THE REGION Transit usage is generally moderate and relatively uniform throughout most block groups in Fresno (see Figure 22). Transit usage is highest in south and west Fresno and lowest in the city’s most northern block groups. Transit Trip Index scores indicate low variation in levels of transit usage among racial and ethnic groups in Fresno, with the Black and Hispanic populations using transit at higher rates than other groups and the white population using transit at lower rates. Compared to populations above the poverty line, transit use is somewhat higher for all racial and ethnic groups below the poverty line. Transit usage is slightly lower and disparities among some racial and ethnic groups slightly higher in the Fresno MSA relative to those in the city of Fresno. The Black and Asian or Pacific Islander populations below the poverty line use public transportation most frequently in the region. Black, Hispanic, and Asian or Pacific Islander populations in the region use transit at higher rates than white and Native American populations. Access to low-cost transportation is moderate and relatively uniform throughout most block groups in Fresno (see Figure 23). Block groups adjacent to the city boundaries tend to have the lowest levels of access to low-cost transportation. As in the Transit Trips Index, there is little variation in Low Transportation Cost Index scores among racial and ethnic groups (see Table 5). Access to low-cost transportation is slightly higher 19 HUD’s data source for its transit trip and low transportation costs indices is Location Affordability Index (LAI) data. For a more detailed description of HUD’s methodology and data sources, please see HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Data Documentation appended to this report. 60 for groups living below the poverty line. Low Transportation Index scores in the Fresno MSA are lower for all populations compared to scores in Fresno. The Black population in the region has the greatest access to low-cost transportation, while the white population has the lowest levels of access. FIGURE 22. TRANSIT TRIPS INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 61 FIGURE 23. LOW TRANSPORTATION COST INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 62 Walk Score measures the walkability of any address by analyzing hundreds of walking routes to nearby amenities using population density and road metrics such as block length and intersection density. Data sources include Google, Education.com, Open Street Map, the U.S. Census, Localeze, and places added by the Walk Score user community. Points are awarded based on the distance to amenities in several categories including grocery stores, parks, restaurants, schools, and shopping. Not only is the measure useful for showing walkability but also access in general to critical facilities. The city of Fresno is generally car-dependent but there is some variation in level of walkability and access to amenities (see Figure 24) among its various communities. Downtown Fresno has the highest levels of walkability, but small walkable areas exist throughout the city. Overall low levels of walkability in Fresno combined with moderate levels of access to low-cost transit point to potential challenges for residents without access to vehicles in accessing needed services and amenities. FIGURE 24. WALKABILITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: Walk Score, Retrieved from: https://www.walkscore.com/CA/Fresno 63 High transportation costs also contribute to overall low levels of affordability in Fresno. For a typical household in the region, combined housing and transportation costs associated with residing in Fresno would make up an estimated 61 percent of household income. For a moderate-income household in the region, the proportion jumps to 71 percent (see Figure 25). Notably, combined housing and transportation costs are lower closer to the city center and are generally higher further out from the city. FIGURE 25. HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION COSTS AS PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN FRESNO AND SURROUNDING AREAS 64 Poverty Residents in high poverty areas tend to have lower levels of access to opportunity due to the absence of critical resources and disinvestment in their communities. As poverty increases, disparities in access to opportunities often increase among population groups and disadvantaged communities become even more isolated. HUD’s Low Poverty Index uses family poverty rates (based on the federal poverty line) to measure exposure to poverty by neighborhood. Values are standardized based on national ranking to produce scores ranging from 0 to 100 where a higher score indicates less exposure to poverty.20 Figure 26 maps Low Poverty Index scores for Fresno. Lighter shading indicates areas of higher poverty and darker shading indicates lower levels of poverty. Figure 27 also shows concentrations of poverty by block group in Fresno. Most block groups in the city have high levels of exposure to poverty, and the overall poverty rate in Fresno is 28.4 percent (see Table 7). However, exposure to poverty varies by location in the city, with some areas of the city experiencing higher rates of poverty than others. Specifically, block groups in south and west Fresno tend to have higher exposure to poverty, while the city’s northernmost block groups have relatively low levels of poverty. Low Poverty Index scores show overall low scores (high exposure to poverty) and large disparities among racial and ethnic groups with regard to exposure to poverty (see Table 5). The White population is exposed to the lowest levels of poverty among population groups. The Hispanic and Black populations experience the greatest exposure to poverty in Fresno. Low Poverty Index scores of racial and ethnic groups in the Fresno MSA are higher than those in the city, indicating lower exposure to poverty in the region. Similar to the city, the white population experiences the lowest exposure to poverty in the region, while the Black and Hispanic populations in the region are exposed to significantly higher levels of poverty (see Table 5). American Community Survey data on poverty status by race and ethnicity shows that the white and Asian populations in Fresno are least likely to be living below the poverty level, while Black and American Indian or Alaskan Native residents experience the highest levels of poverty. The Hispanic population (of any race) constitutes the greatest number of individuals below the poverty level at more than 85,000 people (see Figure 28 and Table 7). 20 HUD’s data source for its low poverty index is the American Community Survey. For a more detailed description of HUD’s methodology and data sources, please see HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Data Documentation appended to this report. LOW POVERTY INDEX: BASED ON NEIGHBORHOOD POVERTY RATES 65 FIGURE 26. LOW POVERTY INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 66 FIGURE 27. POVERTY RATE IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 67 FIGURE 28. PERCENT BELOW POVERTY BY RACE/ ETHNICITY, CITY OF FRESNO, 2013-2017 24% 42% 40% 28% 36% 36% 30% 34% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% White alone Black or African American alone American Indian and Alaska Native alone Asian alone Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone Some other race alone Two or more races Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race)Percent Below Poverty LevelRace/ Ethnicity Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2013-2017 68 TABLE 7. POVERTY STATUS BY RACE/ ETHNICITY, CITY OF FRESNO, 2013-2017 Race Population Population Below Poverty Level Percent Below the Poverty Level White alone 289,659 69,986 24.2% Black or African American alone 39,260 16,408 41.8% American Indian and Alaska Native alone 5,765 2,290 39.7% Asian alone 69,928 19,776 28.3% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 726 259 35.7% Some other race alone 83,115 29,628 35.6% Two or more races 22,036 6,559 29.9% Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 250,924 85,189 34.0% Total Population for Whom Poverty Status is Determined 510,489 144,946 28.4% Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2013-2017 (Table S1701) 69 Environmental Health HUD’s Environmental Health Index measures exposure based on EPA estimates of air quality (considering carcinogenic, respiratory, and neurological toxins) by neighborhood. The index only measures issues related to air quality and not other factors impacting environmental health. Values are standardized based on national ranking to produce scores ranging from 0 to 100 where a higher score indicates less exposure to environmental hazards. Figure 29 maps Environmental Health Index scores for Fresno. Lighter shading indicates areas of higher potential exposure to hazards and darker shading indicates lower levels of environmental hazards. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH INDEX: BASED ON STANDARDIZED EPA ESTIMATES OF AIR QUALITY HAZARDS Most block groups in the city of Fresno have very low air quality. The highest air quality in the city can be found in the city’s most northern block groups, which include high proportions of open space and residential land uses. Spatial patterns of Environmental Health Index scores and residential patterns by race/ ethnicity suggest low levels of disparity among racial and ethnic groups with regard to air quality (see Figure 29). Environmental Health Index scores in Fresno also suggest high levels of exposure to low air quality across racial and ethnic groups, with little disparity among groups (see Table 5). The Hispanic, Black, and Asian or Pacific Islander populations below the poverty line in the city are exposed to the lowest levels of air quality. Air quality throughout the larger Fresno MSA is higher than in the city of Fresno as evidenced by the higher scores, while disparities among population groups are greater than those found in the city (see Table 5). White, Native American, and Hispanic populations in the region experience the highest levels of air quality. Index scores suggest that Black and Asian or Pacific Islander populations reside in areas in the region with the lowest air quality. 70 FIGURE 29. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 71 A Superfund site is any land in the United States that has been contaminated by hazardous waste and identified by the EPA as a candidate for cleanup because it poses a risk to human health and/or the environment. These sites are placed on the National Priorities List (NPL). There are two NPL sites within the city of Fresno--the 145-acre Fresno Municipal Sanitary Landfill in southwest Fresno and the half-acre Industrial Waste Processing site in north Fresno (see Figure 30). The 5-acre T.H. Agriculture & Nutrition Company site, a deleted NPL site in the city, was removed from the NPL in 2006 following cleanup. One NPL site exists immediately outside of the city of Fresno in the community of Malaga. FIGURE 30. SUPERFUND NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL) SITES IN THE FRESNO REGION Map Source: Environmental Protection Agency GIS Data, Retrieved from: https://www.epa.gov/superfund/search-superfund-sites- where-you-live 72 The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) tracks the management of certain toxic chemicals that may pose a threat to human health and the environment. Certain industrial facilities in the U.S. must report annually how much of each chemical is recycled, combusted for energy recovery, treated for destruction, and disposed of or otherwise released on- and off-site. This information is collectively referred to as production-related waste managed. The 18 toxic release inventory facilities in Fresno are clustered in south and west Fresno (see Figure 31). The top five establishments by total disposal or other releases include beverage, food, chemical, and transportation industries (see Figure 32). FIGURE 31. TOXIC RELEASE INVENTORY (TRI) IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: Environmental Protection Agency GIS Data, Retrieved from: https://enviro.epa.gov/triexplorer/tri_factsheet.factsheet?pYear=2017&pstate=CA&pcity=fresno&pParent=NAT FIGURE 32. TOP FIVE ESTABLISHMENTS BY TOTAL DISPOSAL OR OTHER RELEASES IN THE CITY OF FRESNO, 2017 Map Source: Environmental Protection Agency, Retrieved from: https://enviro.epa.gov/triexplorer/tri_factsheet.factsheet?pYear=2017&pstate=CA&pcity=fresno&pParent=NAT 73 Access to environmental amenities is another component of environmental health. According to the Trust for Public Land’s ParkScore data for 2019, Fresno ranks 92nd of the 100 most populous metros in the United States with regard to park acreage, investment, amenities, and access. Fresno received the lowest ratings for park spending per resident (a score of 10 out of 100) and for median park size and percent of area dedicated to parks (a score of 17.5 out of 100). Areas classified as having the highest levels of park need are primarily clustered in west and south Fresno (see Figure 33). FIGURE 33. PARK NEED IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: Trust for Public Land ParkScore, Retrieved from: https://www.tpl.org/city/fresno-california Food Access Food access is another important component of access to opportunity, as access to food that is both affordable and nutritious is a challenge for many individuals and families in the United States. In neighborhoods in which the nearest grocery store is many miles away, transportation costs and lack of vehicle access may present particular challenges for low-income households, which may be forced to rely on smaller stores that are often not affordable and may not offer a full range of healthy food choices. Even in areas in close proximity to food outlets, the higher cost of healthy foods such as produce often present barriers to healthy food access.21 21 Valdez Z, Ramírez AS, Estrada E, Grassi K, Nathan S. Community Perspectives on Access to and Availability of Healthy Food in Rural, Low-Resource, Latino Communities. Prev Chronic Dis 2016;13:160250. 74 The Action Plan to Improve Food Access in the Central Valley (2016) notes that city of Fresno is among the top five urban areas in the country for rates of hunger, with children, the elderly, the homeless, and college students experiencing the highest rates of food insecurity.22 Similarly, analysis by Feeding America indicates that 14.0 percent of all residents and 24.8 percent of children in Fresno County are food insecure, meaning that they lack access, at times, to enough food for an active, healthy life for all members of a given household, and have limited or uncertain access to nutritionally adequate foods.23 While data on food access by neighborhood or census tract is not available for the city of Fresno, stakeholders interviewed in the course of this planning process noted a lack of access to fresh food outlets in south and west Fresno. Survey respondents echoed concerns surrounding food access in the city, with 52 percent noting that grocery stores and other shopping opportunities are not equally provided. Only 22 percent of respondents described grocery stores and other shopping as equally provided in the city. Only parks and trails and property maintenance were ranked as less evenly provided than grocery stores and other shopping. As higher proportions of Hispanic residents live in south and west Fresno, lower levels of food access in these areas of the city may present fair housing concerns. The Action Plan to Improve Food Access in the Central Valley (2016) includes several recommendations to improve food access in the region, including mobile markets, summer meal sites, and job training programs focused on increasing residents’ ability to afford fresh food. Summary City of Fresno residents tend to have moderate proximity to jobs, levels of transit usage, and access to low-cost transportation, with low levels of disparity among racial and ethnic groups. Low scores on the Environmental Health Index suggest poor air quality, with similar scores across racial and ethnic groups. Greater disparities exist among racial and ethnic groups with regard to school proficiency, labor market engagement, and exposure to poverty. The population living below the poverty level has less access to proficient schools, lower labor market engagement, and lower air quality relative to the total population in Fresno. High levels of disparities exist among racial and ethnic groups regarding access to proficient schools in Fresno. The largest disparities exist between the white population (School Proficiency Index score of 59.9) and the Hispanic and Black populations (scores of 34.6 and 35.5, respectively). Disparities among racial and ethnic groups in access to proficient schools are also high the regional level. Fresno has moderate Jobs Proximity Index scores with low levels of disparities in distance to job locations among racial and ethnic groups. Proximity to jobs is similar at the regional level, with little disparity among racial and ethnic groups. In combination with these moderate Jobs Proximity index scores, stakeholder input and Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics data suggest 22 Central Valley Food Access Working Group. (2016). Action Plan to Improve Food Access in the Central Valley. Retrieved from: https://cafarmtofork.cdfa.ca.gov/files/ActionPlantoImproveFoodAccessintheCentralValley.pdf 23 Feeding America. (2017). Map the Meal Gap: Food Insecurity in Fresno County. Retrieved from: https://map.feedingamerica.org/county/2017/child/california/county/fresno 75 that many workers who live in the city commute long distances to their places of work. In particular, 43.5 percent of workers living in Fresno are employed outside of the city. Labor Market Index scores indicate overall low levels of engagement with the labor market, with high levels of disparities among racial and ethnic groups. The white population has the highest level of engagement with the labor market among all groups (43.7 points), followed by the Asian or Pacific Islander population (28.7 points). The greatest disparity in labor market engagement, with a difference of 30.8 points, is between the white population (43.7 points) and the Hispanic population below the poverty line (12.9 points). Transit Trip Index scores indicate little disparity and overall moderate levels of transit usage among racial and ethnic groups in Fresno. Black and Hispanic populations use transit at the highest rates. Transit usage in the Fresno MSA region is lower than that in the city. Low Transportation Cost scores are moderate throughout most block groups in the city, and disparities are low among racial and ethnic groups. The Black and Hispanic populations below the poverty level experience lower transportation costs and closer proximity to public transportation than other groups. Low Poverty index scores indicate high levels of poverty in Fresno, with high levels of disparities among racial and ethnic groups in exposure to poverty. Hispanic and Black populations in the city experience the greatest exposure to poverty, while the white population is the least exposed to poverty. Higher scores in the region suggest that residents outside of the city of Fresno are less exposed to poverty relative to Fresno residents. Indicators of environmental health also indicate disparities among racial and ethnic groups. Air quality is relatively low across all block groups in Fresno, although block groups in the most northern block groups experience slightly better air quality. Environmental Health Index scores suggest little disparity in exposure to low air quality among racial and ethnic groups. Hispanic, Native American, and Black populations below the poverty level experience the greatest exposure to low air quality. Brownfields and toxic sites tend to be clustered in south and west Fresno, areas in which Hispanic, Black, Asian or Pacific Islander, and Native Americans populations tend to make up greater proportions of the city’s population relative to north Fresno. South and west Fresno also tend to have the lowest levels of park access in Fresno, indicating that these areas experience both increased exposure to environmental hazards and reduced access to environmental amenities relative to north Fresno. Finally, research, stakeholder interviews, and a community survey conducted throughout this planning process indicate high levels of food insecurity in Fresno and the region. In particular, stakeholders emphasized that residents in south and west Fresno have less access to fresh, healthy, and affordable food. As higher proportions of Hispanic residents live in south and west Fresno, lower levels of food access in these areas of the city may present fair housing concerns. 76 CHAPTER 6. HOUSING PROFILE The availability of quality affordable housing plays a vital role in ensuring housing opportunities are fairly accessible to all residents. On the surface, high housing costs in certain areas are exclusionary based solely on income. But the disproportionate representation of several protected class groups in low- and middle-income levels can lead to unequal access to housing options and neighborhood opportunity in high-cost housing markets. Black and Hispanic residents, immigrants, people with disabilities, and seniors often experience additional fair housing barriers when affordable housing is scarce. Beyond providing fair housing options, the social, economic, and health benefits of providing quality affordable housing are well-documented. National studies have shown affordable housing encourages diverse, mixed-income communities, which result in many social benefits. Affordable housing also increases job accessibility for low- and middle-income populations and attracts a diverse labor force critical for industries that provide basic services for the community. Affordable housing is also linked to improvements in mental health, reduction of stress, and decreased cases of illnesses caused by poor-quality housing.24 Developing affordable housing is also a strategy used to prevent displacement of existing residents when housing costs increase due to economic or migratory shifts. Conversely, a lack of affordable housing eliminates many of these benefits and increases socioeconomic segregation. High housing costs are linked to displacement of low-income households and an increased risk of homelessness.25 Often lacking the capital to relocate to better neighborhoods, displaced residents tend to move to socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods where housing costs are most affordable.26 This section discusses the existing supply of housing in the city of Fresno. It also reviews housing costs, including affordability and other housing needs by householder income. Homeownership rates and access to lending for home purchases are also assessed. Housing Supply Summary According to the 2013-2017 American Community Survey, there are 176,617 housing units in Fresno, which represents an increase of 18.5% since 2000. Of Fresno’s total housing units, 93.5% are occupied and 6.5% are vacant (a rate which is nearly identical to the city’s vacancy rate in 2000, 6.4%). Vacancies in Fresno County are at 7.5% of all housing units. Both of these rates are relatively low and indicate that additional housing development may be needed to accommodate future population growth. The vacancy rate, calculated from ACS data, includes housing that is 24 Maqbool, Nabihah, et al. "The Impacts of Affordable Housing on Health: A Research Summary." Insights from Housing Policy Research, Center for Housing Policy, www.rupco.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/The-Impacts-of- Affordable-Housing-on-Health-CenterforHousingPolicy-Maqbool.etal.pdf. 25 “State of the Nation’s Housing 2015.” Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University, http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/jchs-sonhr-2015-full.pdf 26 Deirdre Oakley & Keri Burchfield (2009) Out of the Projects, Still in the Hood: The Spatial Constraints on Public- Housing Residents’ Relocation in Chicago.” Journal of Urban Affairs, 31:5, 589-614. 77 available for sale or rent, housing that has been rented or sold but not yet occupied, seasonal housing, and other vacant units. Thus, the actual number of rental and for-sale units that are available for occupancy are likely lower than these figures indicate. TABLE 8. HOUSING UNITS BY OCCUPANCY STATUS Variety in terms of housing structure type is important in providing housing options suitable to meet the needs of all residents, including different members of protected classes. Multifamily housing, including rental apartments, are often more affordable than single-family homes for low- and moderate-income households, who are disproportionately likely to be households of color. Multifamily units may also be the preference of some elderly and disabled householders who are unable or do not desire to maintain a single-family home. Table 9 shows Fresno’s housing units by structure type. The most predominant form of housing unit is the single-family detached home, which makes up 60.6% of Fresno housing units. Over one-quarter of the city’s housing units are either small multifamily units (14.0%) or duplexes, triplexes and quadraplexes (14.2%). Scarcer housing types include large multifamily (4.5%), attached single-family units (2.5%), mobile homes (3.8%) and other units such as RVs, boats and vans (0.1%). Input received during the community engagement process indicated that stakeholders think Fresno would benefit from a wider variety of housing types – including more condominiums and townhomes citywide and rental apartments in North Fresno. In Fresno County, detached single-family homes and large multifamily units are more prominent than in the city (making up 67.7% and 6.5% of county housing units, respectively). Smaller multifamily, single-family attached units, and all other housing units types occur less frequently in the county than in the city of Fresno. 2000 2010 2013-2017 2000-2017 Change City of Fresno Total Housing Units 149,025 171,288 176,617 18.5% Occupied Housing Units 140,079 158,349 165,107 17.9% Vacant Housing Units 8,946 12,939 11,510 28.7% Vacancy Rate 6.4% 7.6% 6.5% +0.1% points Fresno County Total Housing Units 270,767 315,531 326,213 20.5% Occupied Housing Units 252,940 289,391 301,824 19.3% Vacant Housing Units 17,827 26,140 24,389 36.8% Vacancy Rate 6.6% 8.3% 7.5% +0.9% points Data Source: U.S. Census 2000 SF1 Table H003 and 2010 SF1 Table H3 and 2012-2016 5- Year American Community Survey Table B25002 78 *TABLE 9. HOUSING UNITS BY STRUCTURE TYPE Units in Structure City of Fresno Fresno County Number Percent Number Percent 1, detached 107,034 60.6% 220,865 67.7% 1, attached 4,461 2.5% 7,695 2.4% 2-4 24,973 14.2% 37,538 11.5% 5-19 24,790 14.0% 32,571 10.0% 20 or more 14,772 4.5% 11,425 6.5% Mobile home 12,325 3.8% 3,850 2.2% Other (RV, boat, van, etc.) 447 0.1% 84 0.0% Total 326,213 100.0% 176,617 100.0% Data Source: 2013-2017 5-Year American Community Survey Table B25024 Availability of housing in a variety of sizes is important to meet the needs of different demographic groups. Neighborhoods with multi-bedroom detached, single-family homes will typically attract larger families, whereas dense residential developments with smaller unit sizes and fewer bedrooms often accommodate single-person households or small families. But market forces and affordability impact housing choice and the ability to obtain housing of a suitable size, and markets that do not offer a variety of housing sizes at different price points can lead to barriers for some groups. Rising housing costs can, for example, lead to overcrowding as large households with lower incomes are unable to afford pricier, larger homes and are forced to reside in smaller units. On the other hand, people with disabilities or seniors with fixed incomes may not require large units but can be limited by higher housing costs in densely populated areas where most studio or one-bedroom units are located. Table 10 explores housing units in Fresno by size and tenure (the unit’s occupation by either a homeowner or renter). Housing units with two or three bedrooms represent the largest share of owner-occupied and renter-occupied units in Fresno (both approximately 70%). While 28% of owner-occupied units have four or more bedrooms, only 7.8% of renter-occupied units are of this size, which may limit choice for larger renter families. Stakeholder input did note the need for larger, affordable units to meet the needs of large families. Studios and one-bedroom apartments make up the remaining 23% of renter-occupied units, while comprising less than 2% of owner- occupied units. The county has a slightly greater share of 4+ bedroom units occupied by both renters and owners than are available in the city, but a smaller share of one-bedroom units occupied by renters. 79 TABLE 10. HOUSING UNITS BY SIZE AND TENURE Number of Bedrooms City of Fresno Fresno County Number Percent Number Percent Owner-Occupied Housing Units Zero 379 0.5% 760 0.5% One 727 0.9% 1,538 1.0% Two or three 54,364 70.2% 108,200 67.6% Four or more 21,922 28.3% 49,503 30.9% Total 77,392 100.0% 160,001 100.0% Renter-Occupied Housing Units Zero 4,324 4.9% 6,147 4.3% One 15,797 18.0% 22,781 16.1% Two or three 60,793 69.3% 99,751 70.3% Four or more 6,801 7.8% 13,144 9.3% Total 87,715 100.0% 141,823 100.0% Note: Total add to the total number of occupied housing units in each geography. Unoccupied units are not included in this table because tenure data is not available for these units. Data Source: 2013-2017 5-Year American Community Survey Table Assessing housing conditions in an area can provide a basis for developing policies and programs to maintain and preserve the quality of the housing stock. The age of an area’s housing can have substantial impact on housing conditions and costs. As housing ages, maintenance costs rise, which can present significant affordability issues for low- and moderate-income homeowners. Aging rental stock can lead to rental rate increases to address physical issues or deteriorating conditions if building owners defer or ignore maintenance needs. Deteriorating housing can also depress neighboring property values, discourage reinvestment, and eventually impact the quality of life in a neighborhood. Additionally, homes built prior to 1978 present the potential for lead exposure risk due to lead-based paint or lead pipes carrying drinking water. Over one-half of housing units in Fresno were built prior to 1980, making a majority of the city’s housing stock at least 40 years old. Housing units built between 1980 and 1999 represent 30% of the housing stock, while housing built since 2000 only represents 16% of the city’s housing stock. Housing units in the county were built in a similar timeframe as the city of Fresno, although there was a slightly greater percentage of units built between 2000-2009 than in the city. Input received during the community engagement process aligns with age trends to indicate the need for housing rehabilitation in Fresno. Residents and other stakeholders noted the need for single-family home repair and rehabilitation, rental rehabilitation, and improvements to aging mobile homes, particularly roof repair. This need was most commonly identified in Southwest Fresno, although some participants noted homes in need of rehabilitation in other areas as well. 80 FIGURE 34. AGE OF HOUSING IN THE CITY OF FRESNO AND FRESNO COUNTY 25% 10% 18% 15% 15% 12% 4% 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 Before 1960 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010 to present Number of Housing UnitsYear Strucutre BuiltCity of Fresno 23% 10% 18% 14% 15% 15% 4% 0 15,000 30,000 45,000 60,000 75,000 90,000 Before 1960 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010 to present Number of Housing UnitsYear Strucutre BuiltFresno County 81 Housing Costs and Affordability The most common housing need identified by stakeholders related to affordability, particularly for low- and moderate-income households. The National Low Income Housing Coalition’s annual Out of Reach report examines rental housing rates relative to income levels for counties throughout the U.S. The figure that follows shows annual household income and hourly wages needed to afford Fair Market Rents (FMRs) in Fresno County for one, two, and three-bedroom rental units. FIGURE 35. REQUIRED WAGES, AND HOURS TO AFFORD FAIR MARKET RENTS IN FRESNO COUNTY, 2018 Fresno County Housing Costs (Fair Market Rents) 1 Bedroom: $769 2 Bedroom $956 3 Bedroom: $1,364 Required Annual Income $30,760 $38,240 $54,560 Wage for 40 Hour Week $15/hour $18/hour $26/hour or Hours at Min. Wage 49 hours 61 hours 87 hours or Hours at Avg. Renter Wage 46 hours 57 hours 82 hours Note: Required income is the annual income needed to afford Fair Market Rents without spending more than 30% of household income on rent. Minimum wage in Fresno County is $12.00. Average renter wages are $12.81 in Fresno County. Source: National Low Income Housing Coalition Out of Reach 2018, Accessed from http://nlihc.org/oor/california Fair Market Rent (FMR) is a standard set by HUD at the county or regional level for use in administering its Section 8 rental voucher program. FMRs are typically the 40th percentile gross rent (i.e., rent plus utility costs) for typical, non-substandard rental units in the local housing market. TO AFFORD A 2-BEDROOM RENTAL UNIT AT FRESNO’S FAIR MARKET RENT OF $956 WOULD REQUIRE A 61 HOURS WORK WEEK AT MINIMUM WAGE. To afford a one-bedroom rental unit at the FMR of $769 without being cost burdened (i.e., spending more than 30% of income on housing) would require an annual income of at least $30,760. This amount translates to a 40-hour work week at an hourly wage of $15/hour. It would take a 49-hour work week at the minimum wage of $12.00 to afford the unit or a 46-hour work week at the average renter wage of $12.81. Note that average renter wage was derived by the National Low Income Housing Coalition from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages data for the purpose of evaluating local housing affordability. A household could afford the two-bedroom FMR of $956 with an annual income of $38,240 or higher, or a 40-hour work week at an hourly wage of $18/hour. A minimum wage employee would need to work 61 hours per week to afford the unit. A worker earning the average renter wage would have to work 43 hours per week to afford the unit. 82 Overall, this data indicates that low incomes make housing at fair market rents unaffordable to individuals earning the minimum wage in Fresno County. Individuals earning average renter wages and working a 40-hour work week can afford one-bedroom housing at FMR but would not be able to afford larger units. While FMRs are set at the metropolitan level, there is variation in housing costs across the region. Figure 36 show rents and monthly owner costs for households in Fresno and Fresno County. Overall, the distribution of rental units by cost are nearly identical at the city and county levels, with the largest share in each area (30%) renting for between $1,000 and $1,500 a month. One quarter of units rent for between $800 and $999, and another 20% for between $600 and $799. A relatively small share in each area (12%) cost over $1,500 a month. Although rental rates in Fresno and Fresno County are relatively modest compared to many other jurisdictions in California and the US, lower incomes in the city mean that affording housing is still difficult for many Fresno residents. The next section looks more specifically at the relationship between housing costs and income. Monthly owner costs (which includes both households with and without a mortgage) are centered in the $1,000 to $1,499 range. About 25% of owners in Fresno and 23% in Fresno County have housing costs in this range. Another one-quarter have housing costs under $600, which likely includes many owners without mortgages. About 19% of owners in the city spend more than $2,000 on housing costs. The next section also considers need related to affordability, overcrowding, and housing conditions for Fresno homeowners. FIGURE 36. GROSS RENT FOR RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN THE CITY OF FRESNO AND FRESNO COUNTY 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% $2,500 or more $2,000 - $2,500 $1,500 - $2,000 $1,000 - $1,500 $800 - $999 $600 - $799 Less than $599 Renter HouseholdsGross Monthly RentGross Rent for Renter Households City of Fresno Fresno County 83 0%5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% $3,500 or more $3,000 - $3,499 $2,500 - $2,999 $2,000 - $2,499 $1,500 - $1,999 $1,000 - $1,499 $600 - $999 Less than $600 Owner HouseholdsSelected Monthly Owner CostsSelected Monthly Owner Costs for Owner Households with a Mortgage City of Fresno Fresno County Housing Needs Housing cost and condition are key components to housing choice. Housing barriers may exist in a jurisdiction when some protected class groups have greater difficulty accessing housing in good condition and that they can afford. To assess affordability and other types of housing needs, HUD defines four housing problems: 1.A household is cost burdened if monthly housing costs (including mortgage payments, property taxes, insurance, and utilities for owners and rent and utilities for renters) exceed 30% of monthly income. 2.A household is overcrowded if there is more than 1.0 people per room, not including kitchen or bathrooms. 3.A housing unit lacks complete kitchen facilities if it lacks one or more of the following: cooking facilities, a refrigerator, or a sink with piped water. 4.A housing unit lacks complete plumbing facilities if it lacks one or more of the following: hot and cold piped water, a flush toilet, or a bathtub or shower. HUD also defines four severe housing problems, including a severe cost burden (more than 50% of monthly housing income is spent on housing costs), severe overcrowding (more than 1.5 people per room, not including kitchens or bathrooms), lack of complete kitchen facilities (as described above), and lack of complete plumbing facilities (also as described above). To assess housing need, HUD receives a special tabulation of data from the U. S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey that is largely not available through standard Census 84 products. This data, known as Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, counts the number of households that fit certain combination of HUD-specified criteria, such as housing needs by race and ethnicity. CHAS data for the city of Fresno and the Fresno region is provided in the tables that follow. HOUSEHOLDS OF COLOR ARE MORE LIKELY TO HAVE A HOUSING NEED THAN WHITE HOUSEHOLDS IN THE CITY OF FRESNO AND FRESNO COUNTY. IN THE CITY OF FRESNO, HISPANIC AND AFRICAN AMERICAN HOUSEHOLDS ARE 1.5 TIMES AS LIKELY AS WHITE HOUSEHOLDS TO HAVE A HOUSING NEED. There are 80,870 Fresno households that have at least one housing problem, comprising 51% of all households. Nearly one-third (31%) of all households have a severe housing problem. In the region, housing problems occur at slightly lesser rates; 137,555 households (48%) have at least one housing problem and 83,265 households (29%) have a severe housing problem. Several racial and ethnic groups experience a disproportionately greater rate of housing need compared to white Fresnans. HUD defines a group as having a disproportionate need if its members experience housing needs at a rate that is ten percentage points or more above that of white households. While 39% of white households have a housing problem, 65% of Native American households have a housing problem. Disproportionate rates of housing problems also affect 60% of Hispanic households, 59% of Black households and 54% of Asian households. Hispanic households have 36,850 households with a housing problem, the greatest number of any group. Severe housing needs also disproportionately affect non-white households compared to white households. One-fifth of white households in Fresno experience a severe housing problem. Comparatively, over 40% of Hispanic households experience a severe housing problem, followed by Black households (38%), Native American households (37%) and Asian households (35%). Similar patterns exist in Fresno County, where all non-white households, including other, non- Hispanic households, experience disproportionate rates of both housing problems and severe housing problems compared to their white counterparts. Table 11 also compares housing need rates for households by size and familial status. In the city of Fresno, households with five or more members experience housing problems at a rate of 71%, much higher than non-family households (49%) or small families (45%). This pattern continues in the region, where 67% of large families have a housing problem compared to 47% of non-family households and 41% of small families. This aligns with input received during the community engagement process, which indicated the large, low and moderate income families experience greater difficulty obtaining housing that is both affordable and appropriately-sized. Table 12 examines only one dimension of housing need – severe cost burdens. Severe cost burdens affect 23% of all Fresno households and 20% of households in the region. Black households experience a disproportionate rate of severe housing cost, since one-third of Black households experience severe housing cost compared to only 18% of white households. Similarly, Black households are the only group to have a disproportionate rate of severe housing 85 cost in the region, where severe housing costs affect 32% of Black households compared to 16% of white households. Severe housing costs affect small, large and non-family households rather uniformly in both the city and region. In the City of Fresno, one-quarter of non-family households, 22% of small families and 21% of large families have severe housing costs. Comparatively, 24% of non-family households and 19% of both large and small families experience severe housing costs in the region. Figures 37 through 40 map the prevalence of housing cost burdens in Fresno and the Fresno region, along with population by race, ethnicity and national origin. In the city, the highest rates of housing needs are found in census tract 54.08 around Fresno State University, census tract 25.02 along parts of Sequoia Kings Canyon Freeway that are immediate east of downtown Fresno, and census tract 47.04 in northwest Fresno bordered by W. Shields Ave to the south, N. West Ave to the east and W. Dakota Ave to the north. Census tracts in southwest, southeast, west, and central Fresno have elevated levels of housing problems with tracts typically having at least 50% of all households having at least one housing problem. 86 TABLE 11. DEMOGRAPHICS OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH DISPROPORTIONATE HOUSING NEEDS Disproportionate Housing Needs Households Experiencing any of the Four Housing Problems City of Fresno Fresno Region # with problems # of households % with problems # with problems # of households % with Problems Race and Ethnicity White, Non-Hispanic 25,400 64,665 39.3% 46,335 126,010 36.8% Black, Non-Hispanic 8,140 13,775 59.1% 9,105 15,785 57.7% Hispanic 36,850 61,070 60.3% 67,555 118,935 56.8% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 8,443 15,637 54.0% 11,353 22,482 50.5% Native American, Non-Hispanic 445 684 65.1% 764 1,522 50.2% Other, Non-Hispanic 1,595 3,338 47.8% 2,455 5,100 48.1% Total 80,870 159,165 50.8% 137,555 289,815 47.5% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 People 37,590 83,130 45.2% 63,800 156,420 40.8% Family households, 5+ People 19,315 27,093 71.3% 36,490 54,748 66.7% Non-family households 23,970 48,935 49.0% 37,270 78,640 47.4% Households Experiencing any of the Four Severe Housing Problems # with problems # of households % with problems # with problems # of households % with problems Race and Ethnicity White, Non-Hispanic 13,305 64,665 20.6% 23,600 126,010 18.7% Black, Non-Hispanic 5,290 13,775 38.4% 5,860 15,785 37.1% Hispanic 24,615 61,070 40.3% 44,840 118,935 37.7% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 5,402 15,637 34.6% 7,121 22,482 31.7% Native American, Non-Hispanic 250 684 36.6% 429 1,522 28.2% Other, Non-Hispanic 960 3,338 28.8% 1,420 5,100 27.8% Total 49,810 159,165 31.3% 83,265 289,815 28.7% Note: All % represent a share of the total population, except household type and size, which is out of total households. Source: CHAS 87 TABLE 12. DEMOGRAPHICS OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH SEVERE HOUSING COST BURDENS Fresno City of Fresno Fresno Region # with problems # of Households % with problems # with problems # of households % with problems Race and Ethnicity White, Non-Hispanic 11,560 64,665 17.9% 20,185 126,010 16.0% Black, Non-Hispanic 4,595 13,775 33.4% 5,010 15,785 31.7% Hispanic 16,590 61,070 27.2% 28,520 118,935 24.0% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non-Hispanic 3,184 15,637 20.4% 4,270 22,482 19.0% Native American, Non- Hispanic 190 684 27.8% 310 1,522 20.4% Other, Non-Hispanic 715 3,338 21.4% 1,035 5,100 20.3% Total 36,834 159,165 23.1% 59,330 289,815 20.5% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 People 18,620 83,130 22.4% 29,804 156,420 19.1% Family households, 5+ People 5,770 27,093 21.3% 10,335 54,748 18.9% Non-family households 12,450 48,935 25.4% 19,170 78,640 24.4% Note: Severe housing cost burden is defined as greater than 50% of income. All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region, except household type and size, which is out of total households. The # households is the denominator for the % with problems and may differ from the # households for the table on severe housing problems. Source: CHAS 88 FIGURE 37. HOUSING BURDEN AND RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 89 FIGURE 38. HOUSING BURDENS AND NATIONAL ORIGIN IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 90 FIGURE 39. HOUSING BURDEN AND RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE FRESNO REGION 91 FIGURE 40. HOUSING BURDENS AND NATIONAL ORIGIN IN THE FRESNO REGION 92 Homeownership and Lending Homeownership is vital to a community’s economic well-being. It allows the opportunity to build wealth, is generally associated with higher levels of civic engagement,27 and is correlated with positive cognitive and behavioral outcomes among children.28 Federal housing policies and discriminatory mortgage lending practices prior to the Fair Housing Act of 1968, along with continuing impediments to access, have had significant impacts on the homeownership rates of racial and ethnic minorities, particularly Black and Hispanic populations. The gap between the white and Black homeownership rate is the largest among racial and ethnic groups. In 2017, the U.S. Census Bureau reported a 21.6 percentage point gap in homeownership rate between white and Black households; just a 2.9 percentage point decrease since 1997.29 Homeownership trends have changed in recent years because of significant events in the housing market and labor force. The homeownership rate for Millennials (the generation born between 1981 and 1997) is 8 percentage points lower than the two previous generations, controlling for age. This discrepancy can be attributed to a multitude of factors ranging from preference to urban areas, cost of education and associated debt, changes in marriage and childbearing patterns, rising housing costs, and the current supply of affordable houses.30 Table 13 shows the number of owner and renter households, as well as the homeownership rate, by race and ethnicity for the city and region. In Fresno, 48% of households own their homes. The homeownership rate is highest for white households (62.2%), followed by other race households (52.8%) and Asian households (47.0%). About 38% of Hispanic households in the city own their homes, while Black and Native American households have the lowest homeownership rates at 27%. In Fresno County, homeownership rates are higher overall (53.8%) and for each racial and ethnic group. Again, however, African Americans have the lowest homeownership rate at 29.1%, less than half that of white households (67.8%). Homeowners in the city of Fresno are primarily located in pockets of the city. Strong homeownership occurs north of E. Nees Avenue and immediately south of N. Herndon Avenue in northeast Fresno, to the west of N. Fruit Avenue in northwest Fresno, immediately north of W. Clinton Avenue and in areas around N. Polk Avenue in west Fresno, south of E. Belmont Avenue in southeast Fresno, and along N. Fowler and S. Fowler Avenues in southeast Fresno. In these areas, homeownership rates generally exceed 70%. Several census tracts in northeast and northwest Fresno have homeownership rates that exceed 80%. Renters in the city of Fresno, as shown in Figure 41, are mostly clustered in central Fresno, in parts of southeast Fresno along Sequoia Kings Canyon Freeway and near Fresno Pacific 27 Manturuk K, Lindblad M, Quercia R. “Homeownership and civic engagement in low-income urban neighborhoods: a longitudinal analysis.” Urban Affairs Review. 2012;48(5):731–60. 28 Haurin, Donald R. et al. “The Impact of Homeownership on Child Outcomes.” Low-Income Homeownership Working Paper Series. Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. October 2001, http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/liho01-14.pdf. 29 U.S. Census Bureau. Homeownership Rates by Race and Ethnicity of Householder: 1994 to 2017. 30 Choi, Jung et al. “Millennial Homeownership: Why Is It So Low, and How Can We Increase It?” The Urban Institute. February 2000. https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/98729/millennial_homeownership_0.pdf 93 University, near Fresno State University in north Fresno, along Highway 41 from Shaw Avenue up to the Madera County line, in west Fresno between N. Fruit Avenue and E. Shields Avenue and in southwest Fresno between E. California and E. Church Avenues east of Hyde Park. These areas contain census tracts in which the percentage of renters exceeds 70%. Few census tracts have more than 80% renters. Areas where the percentage of renters exceeds 80% exist near the universities, and in the Pinedale neighborhood in north Fresno. Figures 43 and 44 indicate that renters are more predominant in west Fresno County. The percentage of renters exceeds 90% in those census tracts surrounding the Lemoore Naval Air Station. Conversely, homeownership is more prevalent in east Fresno County. County census tract 59.12 east of the City of Clovis has a homeownership rate of 93%. Census tracts north of E. Kings Canyon, extending to the county line, have homeownership rates exceeding 75%. Census tracts adjacent to southeast Fresno also have rates of homeownership that exceed, in some cases, 80%. TABLE 13. HOMEOWNERSHIP AND RENTAL RATES BY RACE AND ETHNICITY Race/Ethnicity City of Fresno Fresno Region Owner Households Renter House holds Home- ownership Rate Owner Househ olds Renter Households Home- ownership Rate Non-Hispanic White 40,220 24,440 62.2% 85,375 40,635 67.8% Black 3,725 10,045 27.1% 4,590 11,185 29.1% Asian 7,355 8,290 47.0% 11,900 10,580 52.9% Native American 190 495 27.7% 515 1,005 33.9% Other 1,765 1,580 52.8% 2,990 2,100 58.7% Hispanic 23,080 37,980 37.8% 50,495 68,450 42.5% Total 76,335 82,830 48.0% 155,860 133,955 53.8% Note: Data presented are number of households, not individuals. Source: CHAS 94 FIGURE 41. SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE RENTERS IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 95 FIGURE 42. SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE OWNERS IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 96 FIGURE 43. SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE RENTERS IN THE FRESNO REGION 97 FIGURE 44. SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE OWNERS IN THE FRESNO REGION 98 Mortgage Lending Prospective homebuyers need access to mortgage credit, and programs that offer homeownership should be available without discrimination. The proceeding data and analysis assesses the degree to which the housing needs of local residents are being met by home loan lenders. The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 (HMDA) requires most mortgage lending institutions to disclose detailed information about their home-lending activities annually. The objectives of the HMDA include ensuring that borrowers and loan applicants are receiving fair treatment in the home loan market. The national 2017 HMDA data consists of information for 12.1 million home loan applications reported by 5,852 home lenders, including banks, savings associations, credit unions, and mortgage companies.31 HMDA data, which is provided by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC), includes the type, purpose, and characteristics of each home mortgage application that lenders receive during the calendar year. It also includes additional data related to those applications including loan pricing information, action taken, property location (by census tract), and information about loan applicants such as sex, race, ethnicity, and income. The source for this analysis is tract-level HMDA data for census tracts wholly or partially within the city of Fresno for the years 2013 to 2017, which includes a total of 29,634 home purchase loan application records.32 Within each record, some data variables are 100% reported: “Loan Type,” “Loan Amount,” and “Action Taken,” for example, but other data fields are less complete. According to the HMDA data, these records represent applications taken entirely by mail, Internet, or phone in which the applicant declined to identify their sex, race and/or ethnicity. Missing race, ethnicity, and sex data are potentially problematic for an assessment of discrimination. If the missing data are non-random there may be adverse impacts on the accuracy of the analysis. Ideally, any missing data for a specific data variable would affect a small proportion of the total number of loan records and therefore would have only a minimal effect on the results. Of total Fresno mortgage loan applications during the five-year time period examined, about 9.8% were denied. There is no requirement for reporting reasons for a loan denial, and this information was not provided from about 23.1% of denials. Further, the HMDA data does not include a borrower’s total financial qualifications such as an actual credit score, property type and value, loan-to-value ratio, or loan product choices. Research has shown that differences in denial rates among racial or ethnic groups can arise from these credit-related factors not available in the HMDA data.33 Despite these limitations, the HMDA data play an important role in fair lending 31 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. “FFIEC Announces Availability of 2017 Data on Mortgage Lending.” May 7, 2018. https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/ffiec-announces-availability-2017-data-mortgage- lending/ 32 Includes applications for the purchase of one-to-four family dwellings (not including manufactured housing) in which the property will be occupied as the owner’s principal dwelling and in which the mortgage will be secured as first lien. Includes applications for conventional, FHA-insured, VA-guaranteed, and FSA/RHS-guaranteed loans. 33 R. B. Avery, Bhutta N., Brevoort K.P., and Canne, G.B. 2012. “The Mortgage Market in 2011: Highlights from the Data Reported Under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act.” Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Federal Reserve Bulletin, Vol. 98, No. 6. 99 enforcement. Bank examiners frequently use HMDA data in conjunction with information from loan files to assess an institution’s compliance with fair lending laws. Complete information about applicant race, ethnicity, and income is available for 27,301 purchase loan applications, or about 92.1% of all applications. Roughly 40% of applications were by white applicants and another 40% by Hispanic or Latino applicants. Asians constituted 14.2% of the pool, African Americans made up 3.6% and applicants of other races, 1.5%. Compared to overall population shares, this breakdown indicates that white households are overrepresented among loan applicants relative to their population citywide (41.6% versus 30.8%), as are Asian households (14.2% versus 12.1%). In contrast, Hispanic and Black residents make up smaller shares of the loan applicant pool than they do the city’s population (39.0% versus 46.7% for Latinos and 3.6% versus 7.4% for African Americans). Table 14 shows loan approval rates for completed loan applications by race and ethnicity at various income levels.34 Not included in these figures are applications that were withdrawn or closed due to incompleteness such that no decision was made regarding approval or denial. At each income level, applicants of color have higher purchase loan denial rates than white applicants. At low incomes, loan denial rates range from 14.0% for white households to rates of 19.6% for Asian applicants, 21.4% for Black applicants, and 24.5% for applicants of other races. At middle incomes, white applicants again had the lowest denial rate (8.4%), while African American and other race applicants saw higher denial rates (13.3% and 15.5%, respectively). At higher incomes, disparities between loan approval rates for white, African American, and other race borrowers persisted. About 7% of white households were denied a home loan compared to 12.8% of other race applicants and 15.3% of Black applicants. Overall, disregarding income, about 8% of white applicant were denied a loan, compared to 12% of Asian and Latino applicants and 15% of Black and other race applicants. These gaps indicate that households of color, particularly African American households, continue to have reduced access to homeownership – they are less likely to apply for mortgage loans than white households and less likely to have those loan applications approved. This data suggests avenues for expanding access to homeownership, including homebuyer readiness classes or other assistance, downpayment assistance programs, and support for households in the process of applying for a loan. The City of Fresno can also meet with local lenders to inform them of goals for furthering fair housing, discuss lending patterns related to homeownership identified in this AI, and build potential partnerships for expanding access to mortgages. 34 The low-income category includes applicants with a household income at or below 80% of area median family income (MFI). The middle income range includes applicants with household incomes from 81% to 150% MFI, and the upper income category consists of applicants with a household income above 150% MFI. 100 TABLE 14. LOAN APPROVAL RATES BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN CITY OF FRESNO, 2013 – 2017 Applicant Income Applicant Race and Ethnicity All Applican ts Non-Latino Latino White Black Asian Other Home Purchase Loans Low Income Completed Applications 1,150 112 652 53 2,759 4,726 Denial Rate 14.0% 21.4% 19.6% 24.5% 16.5% 16.5% Middle Income Completed Applications 3,915 406 1,533 155 4,325 10,334 Denial Rate 8.4% 13.3% 11.4% 15.5% 10.7% 10.1% High Income Completed Applications 5,036 326 1,158 148 2,190 8,858 Denial Rate 7.1% 15.3% 10.7% 12.8% 9.4% 8.5% All Applicants Completed Applications 10,101 844 3,343 356 9,274 23,918 Denial Rate 8.4% 15.2% 12.7% 15.7% 12.1% 10.8% Note: “Completed applications” includes applications that were approved but not accepted, denied, and approved with a loan originated. It does not included applications withdrawn by the applicant or closed for incompleteness. Data Source: FFIEC 2013-2017 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data, Accessed via www.consumerfinance.gov/data-research/hmda 101 Evictions and Housing Instability According to the 2019 Report, Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates, there were approximately 2,342 evictions in the city of Fresno in 2016. Evictions are a critical variable in housing instability, not only because tenants lose their current housing in an eviction, but because evictions can be costly and can impact one’s rental history. In Fresno County, evictions remain in legal records for 7 years, and can negatively impact future housing opportunities. The primary cause for eviction, as noted by the researchers, was failure to pay rent. Of those tenants in the study who were evicted due to non-payment, over 80% owed no more than one month’s rent plus fees when an unlawful detainer lawsuit was brought against them. Other causes for evictions observed in the study included domestic disturbances, guests living in the unit beyond the allotted time for individuals not on the lease, unauthorized pets, and substance abuse or suspicion of the sale of substances. The report indicates that rates of eviction have statistically significant correlation with other factors related to poverty (see Table 15 and Figure 45). Census block groups with the lowest median household incomes in Fresno had eviction rates three times higher than block groups with the highest median household incomes. Furthermore, census block groups with high rates of severe cost burden had an eviction rate of 3.2%, more than twice the eviction rate of census block groups with low cost burden (1.4%) (see Table 16 and Figure 46). TABLE 15. POVERTY RATE AND EVICTION RATE, FRESNO COUNTY, 2016 Neighborhood Poverty Rate Number of Neighborhoods Percent of Neighborhoods Average Eviction Rate 0-10% (Low) 175 29.7% 1.6% 10-30% (Moderate) 202 34.3% 1.8% 30-50% (High) 145 24.6% 2.3% Over 50% (Severe) 67 11.4% 3.2% Data Source: Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates (2019) FIGURE 45. NEIGHBORHOOD EVICTION RATES AND NEIGHBORHOOD POVERTY RATES BY BLOCK GROUP, CITY OF FRESNO, 2016 102 TABLE 16. RENT BURDEN AND EVICTION RATE, FRESNO COUNTY, 2016 Average Rent Burden Number of Neighborhoods Percent of Neighborhoods Average Eviction Rate 0-30% (Low) 182 33.5% 1.4% 30-50% (High) 288 52.9% 2.0% Over 50% (Severe) 74 13.6% 3.2% Data Source: Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates (2019) FIGURE 46. EVICTION RATES AND AVERAGE RENT BURDEN BY BLOCK GROUP, CITY OF FRESNO, 2016 Areas with the lowest median household incomes, as identified in the report, were located in south and southwest Fresno. These areas are predominantly populated by Hispanic, Asian and Black residents. The eviction rate in non-white Fresno neighborhoods was 2.2% compared to 1.6% in majority white neighborhoods.35 It should be noted, however, that CHAS data indicates a large number of severely cost burdened Hispanic households in Fresno as well as white households. Therefore, one’s neighborhood might serve as a stronger determinant of eviction than one’s race or ethnicity. Given the impact of eviction on an individual’s housing opportunities, including the quality of housing, one eviction can initiate a cycle of housing instability for years into the future. Furthermore, evictions in Fresno have their strongest hold in neighborhoods populated by racial and ethnic minorities. Domestic violence is also a major destabilizing factor for Fresno households. Incidents of domestic violence can leave individuals and families without a safe place to live, bringing some victims of domestic violence under a larger umbrella of homeless persons. Fresno has an especially high rate of domestic violence incidents. According to data from Open Justice, a criminal justice database published by the California Department of Justice, Fresno has one of the highest rates of domestic-violence related calls for a city of its size. In 2018, Fresno had 5,499 35 Nkosi, Janine, Amber R. Crowell, Patience Milrod, Veronica Garibay, and Ashley Werner. 2019. Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates. Report prepared on behalf of Faith in the Valley, p. 15. 103 domestic violence-related calls compared to 1,744 calls in Sacramento, a city with a similarly sized population.36 The Marjaree Mason Center, which operates Fresno’s largest domestic violence safe houses, discusses domestic violence in context of Fresno County in its 2014-2017 Strategic Plan. The report states that low-income residents are most likely to utilize police services to handle domestic disputes, although domestic violence occurs at all income levels. Major risk factors for domestic violence, as indicated in the report, include poverty, unemployment, substance abuse and poor education.37 The plan also acknowledges that the region’s agricultural labor market attracts low- income, limited English proficiency, and undocumented workers who may be more reluctant to report domestic violence to police but still require services. Stakeholders from the Marjaree Mason Center note that the average client in a safe house is a 32 to 34-year-old adult with 2 children. Individuals and families who are victims of domestic violence require emergency shelter and transitional housing services once their home is no longer safe. Furthermore, diversion and early intervention programs, such as housing navigation, are critical resources to ensure that victims of domestic violence can find safe and stable alternative housing as early as possible. Zoning, Affordability, and Housing Choice Comprehensive land use planning is a critical process by which communities address a myriad of public policy issues such as housing, transportation, health, recreation, environmental protection, commercial and retail services, and land values, and address how the interconnection and complexity of these issues can ultimately impact the entire municipality. “The land use decisions made by a community shape its very character – what it’s like to walk through, what it’s like to drive through, who lives in it, what kinds of jobs and businesses exist in it, how well the natural environment survives, and whether the community is an attractive one or an ugly one.”38 Likewise, decisions regarding land use and zoning have a direct and profound impact on affordable housing and fair housing choice, shaping a community or region’s potential diversity, growth, and opportunity for all. Zoning determines where housing can be built, the type of housing that is allowed, and the amount and density of housing that can be provided. Zoning also can directly or indirectly affect the cost of developing housing, making it harder or easier to accommodate affordable housing. The following sections will explore (i) how federal and California state law impact local land use and zoning authority and decision-making and (ii) how the zoning and land use codes of the City of Fresno impact housing affordability and fair housing choice. 36 Open Justice. Domestic Violence-Related Calls for Assistance. Retrieved from: https://openjustice.doj.ca.gov/exploration/crime-statistics/domestic-violence-related-calls-assistance 37 Marjaree Mason Center. 2015. 2014-2017 Strategic Plan. Retrieved from: https://mmcenter.org/sites/default/files/2015-finalstrategicplan.pdf, p. 6. 38 John M. Levy. Contemporary Urban Planning, Eighth Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2009. 104 Intersection of Local Zoning with Federal and State Fair Housing Laws From a regulatory standpoint, local government measures to control land use typically rely upon zoning codes, subdivision codes, and housing and building codes, in conjunction with comprehensive plans. Courts have long recognized the power of local governments to control land use, and the California Constitution and Government Code authorize incorporated counties and cities to regulate land use and zoning within their respective jurisdictions. This general grant of home-rule authority is limited by other state code sections (e.g., the General Code, Health and Safety Code, and Public Resources Code) related to public hearings and procedures; density bonuses and incentives; environmental impact reviews; development impact fees; mediation and resolution of land use disputes; transportation management; affordable housing development approvals; subdivision maps; use of surplus land; and supportive housing and residential care facilities, among others. To try to tackle the state’s ever-growing housing affordability crisis, in 2019, California legislators introduced a menu of ambitious bills that would override elements of local zoning control. However, many of these bills faced significant political opposition. Some noteworthy bills that did pass and were signed into law by Governor Newsom include a bill requiring faster approvals for housing and zoning changes; a statewide ban on downzoning; and a statewide ban on housing moratoriums or population caps.39 The state’s Density Bonus Law,40 which mandates that local governments grant density bonuses and other development concessions and incentives to qualifying housing developments that provide affordable housing, also was amended to provide up to an 80% density bonus for 100% affordable housing (amending the previous version which provided a sliding scale of up to a 35% bonus) and no density limits at all within half mile of a major transit stop for affordable housing.41 Another land use bill requires by right zoning approval of homeless shelters.42 The slate of bills passed and signed into law also affect housing providers’/landlords’ obligations and rights, including by limiting evictions to “just causes” (such as a tenant’s failure to pay rent, using the unit for criminal activity, repeated nuisances, major renovation, or demolition) and also sets a statewide limit on annual rent increases.43 California’s planning and land use regulations also require that each jurisdiction adopt “a comprehensive, long-term general plan for [its] physical development.” The General Plan is the jurisdiction’s official policy regarding the location of housing, business, industry, roads, parks, and other land uses, protection of the public from noise and other environmental hazards, and conservation of natural resources. The General Plan may be supplemented by “community plans” and “specific plans” to guide the land use decisions for particular areas or communities within the jurisdiction and describe allowable land uses, identify open space, and detail the availability of facilities, infrastructure, and financing available for the community. The jurisdiction may then adopt 39 SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, to amend Section 65589.5 of, to amend, repeal, and add Sections 65940, 65943, and 65950 of, to add and repeal Sections 65905.5, 65913.10, and 65941.1 of, and to add and repeal Chapter 12 (commencing with Section 66300) of Division 1 of Title 7 of, the Government Code, relating to housing. 40 California Government Code Sections 65915 – 65918. 41 AB 1763, to amend Section 65915 of the Government Code. 42 AB 48, to amend Section 65583 of, and to add and repeal Article 12 (commencing with Section 65660) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of, the Government Code, relating to housing. 43 AB 1482, to add and repeal Sections 1946.2, 1947.12, and 1947.13 of the Civil Code, relating to tenancy. 105 zoning or development codes, subdivision codes, and other planning ordinances to carry out the policies of its general plan consistent with other state mandates. The City of Fresno last adopted an updated General Plan44 in December 2014 and a new Development Code (zoning ordinance) on December 3, 2015, with a new focus on prioritizing growth, reinvestment, and infill development in the Downtown core and transit corridors. A new Zoning Map became effective March 7, 2016, to bring consistency to the General Plan’s Land Use Map with the Development Code. The City’s aim for the new Zoning Map also was to remove as a barrier to development the expensive and time-consuming rezoning process previously required for most new development projects. One goal of zoning is to balance individual property rights and free market forces with the power of government to promote and protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the overall community. Zoning codes regulate how a parcel of land in a community may be used and the density of development. Local governments may divide their jurisdiction into zoning districts by adopting a zoning map consistent with the general plan; define categories of permitted and special/conditional uses for those districts; and establish design or performance standards for those uses. Zoning may regulate the height, shape, and placement of structures and lot sizes or shapes. Jurisdictions also can expressly prohibit certain types of uses within zoning districts.45 In this way, local ordinances may define the type and density of housing resources available to residents, developers, and other organizations within certain areas, and as a result influence the availability and affordability of housing. In Fresno, the Development Code (Chapter 15 of the Code of Ordinances) divides the city into 29 primary zoning districts, including 6 single family dwelling districts, 3 multifamily dwelling districts, one mobile/manufactured home district, 3 mixed-use and 3 downtown residential districts, plus overlay zones (mostly related to historic and environmental resources protection). The code describes allowable uses and development standards in each district, to implement the long- range planning goals of the General Plan. Three decision making bodies are responsible for the administration and implementation of the Development Code: City Council, the Planning Commission, and the Development and Resource Management Director (the “Director”) (with recommendations from the Historic Preservation Commission and Council District Project Review Committees). While local governments have the power to enact zoning and land use regulations, that power is limited by state and federal fair housing laws (e.g., the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and the Unruh Act, the federal FHAA, the Americans with Disabilities Act, constitutional due process and equal protection), which apply not only to private individuals but also to government actions. The FHAA prohibits both private individuals and government authorities from denying a member of a protected class equal access to housing, including 44 See Fresno’s 2014 General Plan, Ch. 11 Housing Element available at: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2019/07/General-Plan-11-Housing-Element-Consistency-7-19.pdf. 45 Local government power to regulate land use derives from the State's expressly delegated police power, first to municipal governments and then to counties, as found in the various enabling statues of the state constitution and Title 7 of the California Government Code, § 65000 et seq. State law requires local planning agencies to prepare and “the legislative body of each county and city shall adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city.” See Gov. Code § 65300 et seq. 106 through the enforcement of a local zoning ordinance that disproportionately limits housing choice for protected persons. In Texas Department of Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, a 2015 landmark disparate impact case under the FHA, the Supreme Court affirmed that part of the FHA’s central purpose is to eradicate discriminatory housing practices, including specifically unlawful zoning laws and other housing restrictions. Besides intentional discrimination and disparate treatment, discrimination under the FHA also includes: [A] refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford such person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. FHA § 804(f)(3)(b). This provision has been held to apply to zoning and land use decisions by local governments. California has adopted a parallel version of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, (the “Fair Housing Act,” “FHA” or “FHAA”), known as the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) (Cal. Gov. Code § 12900 - 12996). Both the FHAA and FEHA prohibit discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housing-related transactions, based on sex (which under the FEHA also includes specifically pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding or medical conditions related to pregnancy, childbirth or breastfeeding), race, color, disability (physical and mental), religion, national origin, or familial status (families with children). California has a broader definition of “disability” than federal civil rights acts. In California, disability includes physical or mental impairments that “limit a major life activity” as opposed to the federal definition which requires that the disabling condition “substantially limit” one or more major life activities. The FEHA also expands on the classes of persons protected against discriminatory housing practices to also prohibit discrimination in housing based on gender, gender identity, and gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, age, source of income, genetic information, and retaliation for protesting illegal discrimination, or “any other basis prohibited by Section 51 of the Civil Code,” which also includes as a basis of protection medical condition, citizenship, primary language, and immigration status. “Source of income” is defined narrowly under the FEHA as “lawful, verifiable income paid directly to a tenant or paid to a representative of a tenant” and under the definition “a landlord is not considered a representative of a tenant.” Accordingly, source of income under the FEHA has been adjudged to not include government rent subsidies, specifically Housing Choice Vouchers under Sec. 8 of the FHA. While the FEHA does not prevent a landlord from refusing to accept tenants who rely on Section 8 vouchers, the California Court of Appeals has found that a local ordinance that specifically protects against discrimination based on a tenant’s participation in the Section 8 program is not preempted by the state law. Fresno did not have a local ordinance protecting tenants relying on Section 8. Because the number of voucher holders often far outnumbers available rental units in an area, in 2019, the state legislature passed, and the governor signed 107 into law, a separate statewide bill that makes it unlawful for landlords to refuse a tenant because that tenant’s source of payment relies on subsidies or participation in Section 8.46 The FEHA prohibits discrimination and harassment in all aspects of housing, including sales and rentals, evictions, terms and conditions, mortgage loans and insurance, and land use and zoning. California’s fair housing law has fewer exemptions than its federal counterpart. An owner- occupied single-family home, where the owner does not rent to more than one individual (as opposed to owner-occupied buildings with no more than four units under the FHAA) and complies with FEHA's prohibition against discriminatory statements, notices, or advertisements, is one of the few exemptions under the FEHA. Exemptions also apply to housing operated by organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy to members and statements indicating a preference for same-sex roommates in shared living situations. The FEHA explicitly prohibits discriminatory “public or private land use practices, decisions and authorizations” including, but not limited to, “zoning laws, denials of permits, and other [land use] actions . . . that make housing opportunities unavailable” to protected groups. Like the FHAA, it requires housing providers to make reasonable accommodation in rules and practices to permit persons with disabilities to use and enjoy a dwelling and to allow persons with disabilities to make reasonable modifications of the premises. Under California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, all persons are entitled to full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all “business establishments,” including both private and public entities. The Unruh Act has been consistently construed to apply to rental housing, and is an additional claim often averred in housing discrimination cases. The Unruh Civil Rights Act protects all persons against arbitrary and unreasonable discrimination by a business establishment. Despite state law generally leaving zoning and land use regulations to local decision-making, the FEHA explicitly preempts any local ordinance that conflicts with the categories of housing discrimination specifically set forth in the statute. Fresno has not adopted a local nondiscrimination ordinance or expanded on the rights and obligations already guaranteed by the FEHA or Unruh Civil Rights Act. City of Fresno Zoning Ordinance Review Although comprehensive plans and zoning and land use codes play an important role in regulating the health and safety of the structural environment, overly restrictive codes can negatively impact housing affordability and fair housing choice within a jurisdiction. Examples of zoning provisions that most commonly result in barriers to fair housing choice include: • Restrictive forms of land use that exclude any specific form of housing, particularly multi- family housing, or that require large lot sizes or low-density that deter affordable housing development by limiting its economic feasibility; 46 SB 329, signed Oct. 8, 2019, to amend Sections 12927 and 12955 of the Government Code, relating to discrimination. 108 • Restrictive definitions of family that impede unrelated individuals from sharing a dwelling unit; • Placing administrative and siting constraints on group homes for persons with disabilities; • Restrictions making it difficult for residents with disabilities to locate housing in certain neighborhoods or to modify their housing; • Restrictions on occupancy of alternative sources of affordable housing such as accessory dwellings, mobile homes, and mixed-use structures. Fresno’s treatment of these types of issues, mainly through its Development Code, is explored and evaluated in Table 17 and the narrative below. Because zoning codes present a crucial area of analysis for a study of impediments to fair housing choice, the latest available Development Code and land use ordinances of the City were reviewed and evaluated against a list of ten common fair housing issues. Taken together, these issues give a picture of (1) the degree to which exclusionary zoning provisions may impact affordable housing opportunities within the jurisdiction and (2) the degree to which the zoning code may impact housing opportunities for persons with disabilities. The zoning ordinance was assigned a risk score of either 1, 2, or 3 for each of the ten issues and was then given an aggregate score calculated by averaging the individual scores, with the possible scores defined as follows: 1 = low risk – the provision poses little risk for discrimination or limitation of fair housing choice, or is an affirmative action that intentionally promotes and/or protects affordable housing and fair housing choice; 2 = medium risk – the provision is neither among the most permissive nor most restrictive; while it could complicate fair housing choice, its effect is not likely to be widespread; 3 = high risk – the provision causes or has potential to result in systematic and widespread housing discrimination or the limitation of fair housing choice or is an issue for which the jurisdiction could take affirmative action to further affordable housing or fair housing choice but has not. The following chart lists the ten issues reviewed and the scores for each issue. A complete report including citations to relevant statutes, code sections, and explanatory comments, are included as an appendix to this document. 109 TABLE 17. ZONING CODE RISK SCORES Issue Risk Score 1a. Does the jurisdiction’s definition of “family” have the effect of preventing unrelated individuals from sharing the same residence? Is the definition unreasonably restrictive? 1b. Does the definition of “family” discriminate against or treat differently unrelated individuals with disabilities (or members of any other protected class)? 1 2a. Does the zoning code treat housing for individuals with disabilities (e.g. group homes, congregate living homes, supportive services housing, personal care homes, etc.) differently from other single family residential and multifamily residential uses? For example, is such housing only allowed in certain residential districts, must a special or conditional use permit be granted before siting such housing in certain residential districts, etc.? 2b. Does the zoning ordinance unreasonably restrict housing opportunities for individuals with disabilities who require onsite supportive services? Or is housing for individuals with disabilities allowed in the same manner as other housing in residential districts? 1 3a. Do the jurisdiction’s policies, regulations, and/or zoning ordinances provide a process for persons with disabilities to seek reasonable modifications or reasonable accommodations to zoning, land use, or other regulatory requirements? 3b. Does the jurisdiction require a public hearing to obtain public input for specific exceptions to zoning and land-use rules for applicants with disabilities? If so, is the public hearing process only required for applicants seeking housing for persons with disabilities or required for all applicants? 1 4. Does the ordinance impose spacing or dispersion requirements on certain protected housing types? 1 5. Does the jurisdiction restrict any inherently residential uses protected by fair housing laws (such as residential substance abuse treatment facilities) only to non- residential zones? 1 6. Does the jurisdiction’s zoning and land use rules constitute exclusionary zoning that precludes development of affordable or low-income housing by imposing unreasonable residential design regulations (such as high minimum lot sizes, wide street frontages, large setbacks, low FARs, large minimum building square footage or large livable floor areas, restrictions on number of bedrooms per unit, and/or low maximum building heights)? 1 7. Does the zoning ordinance fail to provide residential districts where multi-family housing is permitted as of right? Are multifamily dwellings excluded from all single- family dwelling districts? 7b. Do multi-family districts restrict development only to low-density housing types? 1 110 Issue Risk Score 8. Are unreasonable restrictions placed on the construction, rental, or occupancy of alternative types of affordable or low-income housing (for example, accessory dwellings or mobile/manufactured homes)? 1 9a. Are the jurisdiction’s design and construction requirements (as contained in the zoning ordinance or building code) congruent with the Fair Housing Amendments Act’s accessibility standards for design and construction? 9b. Is there any provision for monitoring compliance? 1 10. Does the zoning ordinance include an inclusionary zoning provision or provide any incentives for the development of affordable housing or housing for protected classes? 1 Average Risk Score 1.0 The City’s average risk score (calculated by taking the average of the 10 individual issue scores) is 1.0, indicating that overall there is low risk of the development code and other land use regulations contributing to discriminatory housing treatment or impeding fair housing choice. In most cases, the Development Code and other land use code sections are reasonably permissive and allow for flexibility as to the most common fair housing issues. Remarkably, the City did not receive a “2” (medium risk) or “3” (high risk) score on any of the ten issues evaluated. While facially Fresno’s code does not put it in jeopardy of violating the minimum fair housing and AFFH standards as they relate to local government land use regulations and policies, even well-scoring jurisdictions must also work to apply their land use codes and policies in an equitable manner. Additionally, there are always incremental improvements to be made to rules and policies to more fully protect the fair housing rights and housing choice of all of the City’s residents and to better fulfill the mandate to affirmatively further fair housing. The restriction of housing choice for certain historically/socio-economically disadvantaged groups and protected classes can happen in any number of ways and should be viewed on a continuum. The zoning analysis matrix developed for this report and the narrative below are not designed to assert whether the City’s code creates a per se violation of the FHA or HUD regulations, but are meant as a tool to highlight significant areas where zoning and land use ordinances may otherwise jeopardize the spirit and intent of fair housing protections and HUD’s AFFH standards for its entitlement communities. The issues chosen for discussion show where zoning ordinances and policies could go further to protect fair housing choice for protected and disadvantaged classes, and yet still fulfill the zoning objective of protecting the public’s health, safety, and general welfare. Specifically, the issues highlighted by the matrix inform, first, the degree to which the zoning ordinance may be overly restrictive and exclusionary to the point of artificially limiting the affordable housing inventory and directly contributing to higher housing and rental costs. And secondly, the matrix helps inform the impact the local regulations may have on housing opportunities for persons with disabilities, a protected class under state and federal fair housing law. 111 Impact of Zoning Provisions on Affordable Housing Academic and market research have proven what also is intuitive: land use regulations can directly limit the supply of housing units within a given jurisdiction, and thus contribute to making housing more expensive, i.e. less affordable.47 Exclusionary zoning is understood to mean zoning regulations which impose unreasonable residential design regulations that are not congruent with the actual standards necessary to protect the health and safety of current average household sizes and prevent overcrowding. Zoning policies that impose barriers to housing development by making developable land and construction costlier than they are inherently can take different forms and may include: high minimum lot sizes, low density allowances, wide street frontages, large setbacks, low floor area ratios, large minimum building square footage or large livable floor areas, restrictions on number of bedrooms per unit, low maximum building heights, restrictions against infill development, restrictions on the types of housing that may be constructed in certain residential zones, arbitrary or antiquated historic preservation standards, minimum off-street parking requirements, restrictions against residential conversions to multi-unit buildings, lengthy permitting processes, development impact fees, and/or restrictions on accessory dwelling units. The Brookings Institution has found that “[o]n roughly 75% of land in most cities today, it is illegal to build anything except single-family detached houses. The origins of single-family zoning in America are not benign: Many housing codes used density as a proxy for separating people by income and race.”48 Although today it may be difficult to prove that a zoning ordinance’s preference for single family zoning is facially (or intentionally) discriminatory in direct violation of fair housing laws, such land use regulations still may have the effect of artificially limiting the supply of housing units in a given area and disproportionately reducing housing choice for moderate to low-income families, minorities, persons with disabilities on fixed incomes, families with children, and other protected classes by making the development of affordable housing cost prohibitive. Legitimate public objectives, such as maintaining the residential character of established neighborhoods, environmental protection, or public health, must be balanced with housing needs and availability. When Fresno drafted and adopted its current General Plan in 2014 (along with a Housing Element Amendment in 2017), it recommended large-scale rezones to allow for both more housing units and greater diversity of housing types, infill development, and use of vacant land for residential uses. The City then adopted a new Development Code and updated Zoning Map in 2015 and 2016, respectively, to be more consistent with the policy goals of the General Plan related to housing and to codify those rezonings. 47 See Gyourko, Joseph, Albert Saiz, and Anita A. Summers, A New Measure of the Local Regulatory Environment for Housing Markets: The Wharton Residential Land Use Regulatory Index (2007), available at real.wharton.upenn.edu; Randal O’Toole, The Planning Penalty: How Smart Growth Makes Housing Unaffordable (2006), available at independent.org/pdf/policy_reports/2006-04-03-housing.pdf; Edward L. Glaeser and Joseph Gyourko, The Impact of Zoning on Housing Affordability (2002), available at law.yale.edu/system/files/documents/pdf/hier1948.pdf; The White House’s Housing Development Toolkit, 2016, available at whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/images/Housing_Development_Toolkit%20f.2.pdf. 48 Baca, Alex, “Gentle” Density Can Save Our Neighborhoods, Dec. 4, 2019, available at https://www.brookings.edu/research/gentle-density-can-save-our-neighborhoods. 112 With the General Plan’s Housing Element Amendment and rezonings implemented through the new Development Code and Zoning Map, Fresno shifted from a preference for single-family detached housing to residential and mixed-use zones that allow more density and housing type diversity. The Development Code and Zoning Map, however, still maintain single family detached only zoning districts (RE, RS-1, RS-2, and RS-3)—with no duplexes, townhomes, triplexes, row homes, garden homes, zero lot line dwellings, or the like. (Accessory/Secondary dwelling units are permitted, however, in all single-family districts. See description below regarding Issue 8 of the matrix.) In the RS-4 district, single family attached dwellings are a conditional use. In the RS- 5 district, single family attached dwellings and cottage housing are permitted by right uses; duplexes and multi-unit dwellings require conditional use permit approval. For each district, the City has established a density limit, minimum lot size, minimum setbacks, maximum lot coverage, maximum height of 35 feet, and other development controls. The Development Code and Zoning Map divide single-family zoning into 6 districts with a range of densities (up to 12 units/acre, without density bonus) and minimum lot sizes ranging from 5 acres in the RE district; 36,000 sq. ft. in the RS-1 district; 20,000 sq. ft. in the RS-2 district; 9,000 sq. ft. in the RS-3 district; 5,000 sq. ft. in the RS-4; and 4,000 sq. ft. in the RS-5 district. To promote more density and infill development the RS-3, RS-4, and RS-5 districts also have maximum lot size requirements. In the RM-1 multifamily district, single family detached, single family attached, duplexes, and cottage housing (as well as multifamily) are permitted uses under the same RS-5 lot and design standards. Single family attached and duplexes also are permitted in the RM-2 district, and duplexes are permitted by right in the RM-3 district. Cottage housing developments, also known as “pocket neighborhoods,” are a group of 4 to 12 single-family homes, between 600 and 1,200 square feet, that are arranged in common relation to one another, usually surrounding a shared landscaped area. Cottage housing, permitted in the RS-5 and RM-1 districts, can be built at a density of up to 1.33% of the number of units permitted in the underlying district. The cottage housing option allows more diversity in housing options and infill development opportunities while protecting the character of single-family neighborhoods. While any development standards place some degree of artificial pressure on the cost of housing and limit housing diversity, density, and socioeconomic integration within many desirable neighborhoods, and some of Fresno’s low and very-low density single-family districts have more barriers to affordable housing development, with the range of densities and housing types permitted in the medium and high density districts, opportunity for density bonuses (see Issue 10) and infill development, and vacant or underdeveloped land available (see Housing Element of the General Plan) overall Fresno’s zoning code should not unreasonably exclude development of affordable single family dwelling types within the City. Because of the recent amendments to the Housing Element and Development Code/Map, Fresno received a “1/low risk” score on Issue 6 of the matrix related to exclusionary zoning. Exclusionary zoning can happen on a continuum and there is more the City can do to use zoning and land use policies to further remove artificial barriers to development of and access to affordable housing across all residential zones. While Fresno is not the most restrictive, there 113 are, however, opportunities for greater flexibility to encourage more affordable housing development in the traditionally single-family districts. Allowing more housing units in the single- family districts can bring down average housing prices as it spreads the cost of land across more homes and creates more supply in the housing market. This can be accomplished in a variety of ways; for instance, by permitting or incentivizing conversion of large single-family dwellings or replacement of detached dwellings on large lots to attached dwellings, 2-family, 3- family, or low density multifamily dwellings compatible in physical scale with single-family dwellings. Other tools include lowering the minimum lot size requirements and relaxing other development controls like minimum lot widths and setbacks, maximum height allowances, etc. Or to assuage concerns about changing the established physical character of a neighborhood, general requirements about height, yard space, and architectural elements can remain unchanged in those zones, making attached and alternative housing types less daunting for neighbors. Other alternatives to large lot sizes may include cluster developments, density blending, zero lot line developments (rowhouses, garden homes, patio homes, and townhomes), and transfer of development rights in appropriate locations. The City could follow the example of cities such as Minneapolis, which has up-zoned every residential zoning district to eliminate single-family detached only zones. Allowing duplexes and triplexes on what had been single- family lots theoretically can double or triple housing capacity in many neighborhoods. Relaxing exclusionary land use standards citywide may not be a silver bullet to solving the housing shortage and affordability crisis many jurisdictions around the state and country face, but over time can make allowance for incremental improvements and alleviate the local government’s own complicity in the problem. Besides the rezonings to an RM multifamily category recommended by the General Plan update, it also called for some commercial and office zoned lands suitable for residential developments to be rezoned to a new Mixed-Use or Downtown category that allows for both residential and commercial/office uses. Three Downtown Districts were created for the urban core in 2016: DTC (Downtown Core), DTG (Downtown General), and DTN (Downtown Neighborhood). The new Downtown standards allow for the development of fully residential projects and establish unlimited residential densities and intensity (floor-to-area ratio) at building heights up to 15 stories. In the city’s core, the City provides reduced application fees and priority processing for single and multifamily projects. The Mixed-Use regulations were implemented to promote pedestrian- oriented infill development, intensification, and reuse of land with ground-floor neighborhood retail uses and upper-level multifamily housing and a mix of small lot single-family attached houses and townhomes. The Development Code and Zoning Map make possible reasonable development of by right multifamily units at varying density allowances in the multifamily Medium High Density RM-1, Urban Density RM-2, High Density RM-3 districts; Mixed Use NMX, CMX, and RMX districts; Commercial CMS and CR districts; and Downtown DTN, DTG, and DTC zoning districts. The RM, Mixed Use, Commercial, and Downtown districts also permit a mix of other housing types including single family attached and duplexes. The Development Code and General Plan provide for a range of densities for multifamily in the RM districts (up to 45 units/acre, without density bonus, in the RM-3 district); mixed-use buildings or standalone residential in the Commercial districts (up to 16 units/acre); and mixed-use buildings in the Mixed Use districts (up to 45 114 units/acre, without density bonus, in the RMX district) and in the Downtown districts with no density limits. The development regulations for the RM districts include minimum densities for multifamily as well. Fresno received a “1/low risk” score on Issue 7 of the matrix related to permitted by right multifamily development.49 As for Issue 8 regarding alternative types of affordable housing, the City scored a “1/low risk” because it permits both manufactured housing and accessory dwelling units. State law mandates that accessory dwelling units be permitted by right wherever single-family dwellings are permitted, subject to local design and development conditions. ADUs have the potential to reduce barriers to housing options for some families as a form of infill-development that can be affordable and offer important housing choice within existing high-opportunity neighborhoods. Under Fresno’s Development Code, “Second Dwelling Units” (i.e. accessory dwelling units), “Backyard Cottages” (i.e. “tiny homes”), and “Accessory Living Quarters” (dependent units) are permitted by right in all the single-family and multifamily districts where they meet zoning and design requirements. The maximum floor areas are 1,250 sq. ft. for a second dwelling unit, 440 sq. ft. for a backyard cottage, and 500 sq. ft. for an accessory living quarter. In 2019, the California legislature passed a bill that limits fees and restrictions on building new accessory dwelling units. For example, ADUs created by converting a garage would not be required to have replacement parking.50 Another ADU bill eliminates minimum lot size requirements for adding an ADU, requires proposed ADUs to be ministerially approved or denied within 60 days, and allows ADUs to be added inside existing apartment buildings (typically via conversion of parking garages).51 In Fresno, a manufactured/factory-built house is considered a single-family detached dwelling unit and is treated as such. Manufactured homes in compliance with state and local regulations may be used for residential purposes if built on a permanent foundation. Mobile home parks are permitted in the RM-MH district, with a minimum density of 12 u/a and a maximum density of 16 u/a. Inclusionary Zoning and Density Bonuses Inclusionary zoning can be an important tool for affirmatively furthering fair housing choice. Voluntary and mandatory IZ can both help boost the number of affordable units and act as a desegregation tool to help support neighborhood diversity and keep high-opportunity areas affordable for a greater socioeconomic swath of the population. Because the private developer subsidizes the affordable units (in exchange for greater density and other development 49 While multifamily dwellings are a permitted use in the RM, Mixed Use, and Downtown districts, a determination of whether a sufficient portion of the zoning map permits multifamily development to meet demand was not made. Besides development controls and permit procedures, availability of land affects the feasibility of developing multifamily housing. The housing element of the General Plan describes the availability of vacant and underdeveloped land that may be designated for multifamily dwellings. Other considerations like housing market conditions, existing land-use patterns, the provision of public services and infrastructure, demand for “luxury” units, and other planning goals also have an impact on the quantity of multifamily and affordable housing. 50 SB 13, effective October 9, 2019, to amend, repeal, and add Section 65852.2 of the Government Code, and to add and repeal Section 17980.12 of the Health and Safety Code, relating to land use 51 AB 68, effective October 9, 2019, to amend Sec. 65852.2 and 65852.22 of the Government Code. 115 concessions), the main difficulty in implementing inclusionary zoning is finding how much below market rentals/sales developers will tolerate before making new housing construction economically infeasible and actually having a negative effect on housing unit production. As for Issue 10 regarding inclusionary zoning efforts, Fresno’s Development Code does include voluntary inclusionary zoning incentives for the development of affordable housing and housing for older persons, tracking the State’s mandate for local governments to implement the state density bonus law. The bonuses under the local ordinance apply to general residential projects of five or more units and senior housing projects of more than 35 units. Developments that meet the thresholds for density bonuses also may qualify for other incentives and concessions such as modification of development standards, reduced off-street parking requirements; or others proposed by the developer or the City that result in identifiable cost reductions. Under the current local ordinance, the developer may receive a density bonus of (a) 20% if 5% of the total units of a housing development are affordable to very low income households; (b) 20% if 10% of the total units of a housing development are affordable to lower income households; (c) 20% if a housing development qualifies as a Senior Citizen Housing Development; (d) 5% if 10% of the total dwelling units in a condominium project are affordable to persons and families of moderate income; (e) 25% for conversion of apartments to condos if at least 33% of the total units of the proposed condominium project are affordable to persons of low or moderate income or if 15% of the total units of the condominium project are affordable to lower income households; or (f) additional density bonus or concessions for a development that includes a state childcare facility or a donation of land that could accommodate at least 40 units. For rental units, the City and property owner must enter into an enforceable recorded covenant which governs such things as number of units; target units; household income group; certification procedures; building schedule; term of affordability; remedies for breach; etc. Fresno’s Development Code also includes a Transit Oriented Development-TOD Height and Density Bonus that may be used in combination with an Affordable Housing Density Bonus. For projects that qualify for both the TOD bonus and Affordable Housing bonus, the bonus height may exceed the base district height by 25% and the bonus density may exceed that of the base district by 100%. California’s density bonus law has been amended many times since it was first adopted in 1976 to clarify the legislation in response to legal and implementation challenges and to add new provisions and standards. For instance, the term of affordability has gone up from 30 to 55 years for low and very low-income units under state law. Other changes to the state law that are not yet reflected in Fresno’s local ordinance include an update to the reduced parking requirements as a development incentive; density bonus option for commercial developments that include affordable dwelling units; other housing categories that are eligible for a density bonus like low-income student housing, transitional housing for foster youth, housing for veterans, and housing for persons experiencing homelessness; and rules clarifying the application and processing requirements, among others. The state regulations regarding density bonuses use a sliding scale so that the greater the percentage of affordable units, the higher the density bonus. The newest 116 amendments, which took effect January 1, 2020, significantly increase the potential density bonus and concessions to which a developer may be entitled. For 100% affordable housing projects, the development can receive an 80% density bonus over the base density, four regulatory concessions, and are not subject to any minimum parking requirements. If the project is within one-half mile of a major transit stop, the city may not apply any density limit to the project and it will also receive a height increase of up to three additional stories, or 33 feet. Limits on 100% affordable projects will only come from other local development standards like maximum height limits, setbacks, lot coverage, etc. (which also may be subject to allowable concessions). Fresno’s ordinance was last updated effective 2016. However, as the state law is amended from time to time, the updated requirements are incorporated by reference into the local ordinance regarding inclusionary zoning bonuses. “The provisions of this section shall be governed by the requirements of Government Code Section 65915. Where conflict may occur between the provisions of this section and State law, the State law shall govern.” Fresno should update its density bonus ordinances to codify changes to the state law that have occurred since its last update, including the new bonus for 100% affordable projects. The City could go even further than the state bonus law in ensuring the long-term affordability of not just rental units but owner-occupied units as well. For-sale units are only required to be affordable to the initial occupants of the units, who must be very low income, lower income or moderate income, as applicable. At resale, the local government must enforce an equity-sharing agreement (involving sale of the home at fair market value and sharing of the profits with the city). To avoid losing affordable owner-occupied units with the first resale, Fresno could adopt requirements for deed restrictions or other measures to protect long-term affordability for an owner-occupied project to be eligible for a density bonus. Fresno could also consider adopting mandatory inclusionary zoning requiring that developers wanting to build in the city’s strongest housing markets or core neighborhoods provide some amount of affordable units, as mandatory vs. voluntary inclusionary programs have shown much more success in actually producing new affordable units.52 A 2006 survey of mandatory and voluntary inclusionary programs in California found that of the 170 then-known programs in the state, 24 of these programs had been able to produce 10% or more of their new units as inclusionary housing. Of these 24 productive programs, 22 were mandatory vs. 2 that were voluntary (and which were actually found to have relied on growth management policies to produce the affordable housing).53 Although no one specific zoning change will solve affordable or fair housing needs alone, taken together these zoning tools could potentially allow for an increased supply of housing more equitably across the jurisdiction, both single-family and multi-unit, which helps put downward pressure on rental and sale prices, so that moderate and low-income families have access to all 52 See Brian R. Lerman, Mandatory Inclusionary Zoning—The Answer to the Affordable Housing Problem, 33 B.C. ENVTL. AFF. L. REV. 383, 387–88 (2006); Pinedo, Victor J., Embracing the Excluded: Using Mandatory Inclusionary Zoning to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing in St. Louis, Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy: Vol. 26 : Iss. 2 , Article 5 (2016). 53 Nonprofit Housing Association of Northern California, Affordable by Choice: Trends in California Inclusionary Housing Programs, 2006, available at http://inclusionaryhousing.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/NPH-IHinCA2006.pdf. 117 the congruent benefits that come with housing choice including access to better jobs, schools, public transportation, healthcare, cultural amenities, and public accommodations. 118 CHAPTER 7. PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING Publicly supported housing encompasses several strategies and programs developed since the 1930s by the federal government to ameliorate housing hardships that exist in neighborhoods throughout the country. The introduction and mass implementation of slum clearance to construct public housing projects during the mid-1900s signified the beginning of publicly supported housing programs. Government-owned and managed public housing was an attempt to alleviate problems found in low-income neighborhoods such as overcrowding, substandard housing, and unsanitary conditions. Once thought of as a solution, the intense concentration of poverty in public housing projects often exacerbated negative conditions that would have lasting and profound impact on their communities. THERE ARE OVER 13,000 SUBSIDIZED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS IN FRESNO. MOST OF THESE ARE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS AND LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT UNITS. HOUSEHOLDS OF COLOR ARE OVERREPRESENTED IN PUBLIC HOUSING AND IN THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM RELATIVE TO THEIR OVERALL POPULATION SHARES IN THE CITY OF FRESNO. Improving on public housing’s model of high-density, fixed-site dwellings for very low-income households, publicly supported housing programs have since evolved into a more multi-faceted approach overseen by local housing agencies. The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 created Section 8 rental assistance programs. Section 8, also referred to as the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program, provides two types of housing vouchers to subsidize rent for low-income households: project-based and tenant-based. Project-based vouchers can be applied to fixed housing units in scattered site locations while tenant-based vouchers allow recipients the opportunity to find and help pay for available rental housing on the private market. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 created the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program to incentivize development of affordable, rental-housing development. Funds are distributed to state housing finance agencies that award tax credits to qualified projects to subsidize development costs. Other HUD Programs including Section 811 and Section 202 also provide funding to develop multifamily rental housing specifically for disabled and elderly populations. The now-defunct HOPE VI program was introduced in the early 1990s to revitalize and rebuild dilapidated public housing projects and create mixed-income communities. Although HOPE VI achieved some important successes, the Choice Neighborhoods Initiative program was developed to improve on the lessons learned from HOPE VI. The scope of Choice Neighborhoods spans beyond housing and addresses employment access, education quality, public safety, health, and recreation.54 54 Department of Housing and Urban Development. Evidence Matters: Transforming Knowledge Into Housing and Community Development Policy. 2011. www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/em/EM-newsletter_FNL_web.pdf. 119 Current publicly supported housing programs signify a general shift in ideology toward more comprehensive community investment and de-concentration of poverty. However, studies have shown a tendency for subsidized low-income housing developments and residents utilizing housing vouchers to continue to cluster in disadvantaged, low-income neighborhoods. Programmatic rules and the point allocation systems for LIHTC are thought to play a role in this clustering and recent years have seen many states revising their allocation formulas to discourage this pattern in new developments.55 The reasons for clustering of HCVs is more complicated since factors in decision-making vary greatly by individual household. However, there are indications that proximity to social networks, difficulties searching for housing, and perceived or actual discrimination contribute to clustering.56 This section will review the current supply and occupancy characteristics of publicly supported housing types and its geographic distribution within the study area. Supply and Occupancy Fresno residents are served by the Fresno Housing Authority (Fresno Housing, or “FH”). FH combines into a single organization the Housing Authority of the City of Fresno and the Housing Authority of Fresno County, technically both separate entities with their own distinct boards of commissioners. Data from HUD’s Picture of Subsidized Housing indicates that there are 13,596 publicly supported housing units associated with the City’s Housing Authority (see Table 18). These units include public housing, project-based Section 8, housing choice vouchers and “other multi-family”, which includes units designated for seniors and/or disabled residents through the Section 202 and Section 811 programs. There are also approximately 6,547 LIHTC units in the city. Together, publicly supported housing in Fresno makes up over 11% of the city’s housing units. The FH’s 2020 Annual Plan provides the most recent record of the FH housing inventory; the plan states that there are 506 public housing units and 7,159 housing choice vouchers in use, equaling 7,665 publicly supported housing units. TABLE 18. UNITS BY PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITY Housing Authority Public Housing Units Housing Choice Vouchers Housing Authority of the City of Fresno 506 7,159 Housing Authority of the Fresno County 607 5,652 Source: 2020 Annual PHA Plans 55 Dawkins, Casey J. Exploring the Spatial Distribution of Low Income Housing Tax Credit Properties. US Department of Housing and Urban Development, www.huduser.gov/publications/pdf/dawkins_exploringliht_assistedhousingrcr04.pdf. 56 Galvez, Martha M. What Do We Know About Housing Choice Voucher Program Location Outcomes? A Review of Recent Literature. What Works Collaborative, 2010. www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/29176/412218- What-Do-We-Know-About-Housing-Choice-Voucher-Program-Location-Outcomes-.PDF. 120 TABLE 19. PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING UNITS BY PROGRAM CATEGORY Housing Units City of Fresno Fresno Region # % # % Total housing units 176,617 - 326,213 - Public housing 651 0.4% 1,180 0.4% Project-based Section 8 2,199 1.2% 3,083 0.9% Other multifamily 98 >0.1% 298 >0.1% HCV program 10,648 6.0% 12,705 3.9% LIHTC program 6,547 3.7% - - Source: 2013-2017 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table DP04; APSH; HUD User LIHTC Database Table 20 shows residents of publicly supported housing in the city by race and ethnicity. While Hispanic households make up 38.4% of the city’s households, they make up over half of the city’s public housing residents, 45% of HCV holders and 44% of residents in Project Based Section 8 housing. Black residents also make up a significant percentage of the public housing residents (28%) and HCV holders (35%), despite being only 8.7% of the city’s population. White households make up nearly 55% of all residents in other multi-family units such as senior housing and housing for the disabled, which is also the publicly supported housing type with the largest number of Asian households. These patterns continue in the Fresno region, where Hispanic households make up an even larger share of public housing residents (65%), Project Based Section 8 residents (52%) and HCV holders (48%). White households again make up the majority of “other multifamily” housing residents in the region, comprising 64% of residents in this housing type. 121 TABLE 20. PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING RESIDENTS BY RACE/ETHNICITY Housing Type Race/Ethnicity White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander # % # % # % # % City of Fresno Public Housing 59 8.9% 185 28.0% 367 55.6% 47 7.1% Project-Based Section 8 501 24.5% 399 19.5% 890 43.5% 150 7.3% Other Multifamily 51 54.8% 7 7.5% 22 23.7% 11 11.8% HCV Program 1,274 12.8% 3,458 34.6% 4,524 45.3% 668 6.7% 0-30% AMI 5,210 23.0% 3,720 16.4% 10,830 47.8% 2,410 47.8% 0-50% AMI 10,020 22.7% 6,005 13.6% 20,960 47.5% 4,539 47.5% 0-80% AMI 18,645 26.5% 8,100 11.5% 33,545 47.7% 6,897 47.7% Total Households 64,665 40.6% 13,775 8.7% 61,070 38.4% 15,637 38.4% Fresno Region Public Housing 77 7.9% 207 21.3% 632 64.9% 56 5.8% Project-Based Section 8 511 21.1% 402 16.6% 1,253 51.7% 152 6.3% Other Family 181 63.7% 15 5.3% 67 23.6% 17 6.0% HCV Program 1,704 13.8% 3,877 31.5% 5,861 47.6% 793 6.4% 0-30% AMI 9,410 26.4% 3,950 11.1% 18,650 52.3% 2,875 52.3% 0-50% AMI 17,000 23.6% 6,535 9.1% 38,350 53.1% 5,649 53.1% 0-80% AMI 32,385 27.1% 8,845 7.4% 63,480 53.1% 9,052 53.1% Total Households 126,010 43.5% 15,785 5.5% 118,935 41.0% 22,482 41.0% Note: Data presented are number of households, not individuals. Source: Decennial Census; CHAS; APSH 122 Geography of Supported Housing In the map that follows, the locations of publicly supported housing developments are represented along with levels of Housing Choice Voucher use, which is indicated by gray shading. Superimposed over the map are also dots representing racial/ethnic demographics. The blue markers on the maps indicate the locations of public housing. Figure 47 indicates several public housing developments including Fairview Heights Terrace and Yosemite Village, Phase II in Southwest Fresno, Yosemite Village and Parc Grove Commons II east of Hwy 41 in the Maclane neighborhood, and Pacific Gardens in Southeast Fresno. The orange markers on the maps indicate the location of Project Based Section 8 units. Figure 47 shows clustering of Project Based Section 8 units in Southwest Fresno, Central Fresno, West Fresno and some scattered locations along Kings Canyon Road in Southeast Fresno. The El Cazador Apartments just south of Shaw Avenue and the Millbrook Park Apartments located north of Herndon Avenue represent the few Project Based Section 8 locations toward northern Fresno. Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) developments are also indicated on the maps with purple markers. The LIHTC program is the primary source of subsidy for development of affordable housing by the private market. Created by the Federal Tax Reform Act of 1986, the LIHTC program makes available an indirect federal subsidy for investors in affordable rental housing. The value of the tax credits awarded to a project may be syndicated by the recipient to generate equity investment, offsetting a portion of the development cost. As a condition of the LIHTC subsidy received, the resulting housing must meet certain affordability conditions. FH is an active and successful LIHTC developer, having built more than 30 properties over the last 10 years. LIHTC developments can be found in almost every Fresno neighborhood, except for northeast Fresno. Clusters of LIHTC developments are found west of in Southwest Fresno south of E. California Avenue, in Southeast Fresno, south of East Kings Canyon Road, and in west Fresno along N. Marks Avenue and N. Brawley Avenue. There are LIHTC developments in the Hoover neighborhood located north of downtown, however, only one LIHTC site is located north of Herndon Avenue. There are no LIHTC sites in northwest Fresno. Other multifamily units are indicated on the maps below with green markers. There are two developments within this “other multifamily” category located within Fresno’s city limits. Arbor Court in Southeast Fresno provides 19 units which exclusively serve disabled households. The Sierra Gateway Senior Residence in West Fresno serves seniors. The rates at which Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs) are used are represented by the shading on the maps. HCVs are issued to households and may be used at a rental unit of the tenant’s choosing to reduce the tenant’s share of rent payments to an affordable level. Therefore, unlike the publicly supported developments marked on the map, HCVs are portable and their distribution throughout the city is subject to fluctuate based on location preferences of individual voucher households and the participation of landlords in the HCV program. Housing choice vouchers are in use across west, central and south Fresno. Central Fresno has clusters of HCV use east of Highway 41 and south of E. Ashlan Avenue. In Southeast Fresno, census tracts abutting Sequoia- Kings Canyon Freeway, and further south along E. Kings Canyon Road show clustering of HCV use. HCV use is also prevalent in West Fresno, south of N. Santa Fe Avenue. This area, separated by railroad tracks from northwest Fresno, indicates the stark difference between northwest and northeast Fresno and the rest of the city. Northeast Fresno has very limited HCV use, with only four census tracts north of Herndon Avenue containing any HCVs, and of those 123 four tracts, no tract exceeds 5% HCV use. Northwest Fresno also has limited HCV use; the single census tract north of N. Santa Fe Avenue with HCV use is composed of approximately 18% vouchers. A recent change to state law went into effect in January 2020 that protects HCV holders from discrimination by landlords based on their participation in the HCV program. With this new prohibition against landlords refusing HCV tenants, resources to educate northeast and northwest Fresno landlords who have traditionally not participated in the HCV program should be considered as ways to improve and balance the distribution of HCVs in the city. 124 FIGURE 47. PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING AND RACE / ETHNICITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 125 FIGURE 48. PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING AND RACE / ETHNICITY IN THE FRESNO REGION 126 Policy Review As required by HUD, the Housing Authority of the City of Fresno (also known as the Fresno Housing Authority or FH) maintains a comprehensive Five-Year Plan with annual plan updates, as well as other program-specific policies. The most pertinent of these policies for review in this analysis is the Admissions and Continued Occupancy Policy, or ACOP. These documents set policy for who may be housed by the housing authority and how those tenant households are selected. Three different aspects of the ACOP are examined here: tenant selection, local preference, and tenant screening. These three policy types all allow some degree of local determination by FH and are among the most central to matters of fair housing choice. FH’s tenant selection process begins with its interest list, which applicants must be added to in order to be interviewed for housing. Applicants to FH must complete a pre-application form, which places them on an interest list for the site of their choice. Households are placed on the interest list according to the number of bedrooms required for the family. Once an application has been selected from the interest list, all adult family members must attend a face-to-face interview. The interview process includes the completion and signing of the FH application, and signing the Personal Declaration packet – which includes declarations about citizenship and other required criteria. If after the interview the family is determined to be eligible for housing, the family will be notified of the time frame to expect placement in a unit. Families deemed eligible will be offered a housing unit based on their placement on a wait list. Once the FH offers a unit to an applicant, the applicant has 3 business days to accept the unit before being removed from the waiting list. Fresno Housing Authority’s Residency Preference Policy gives preference during the application process to families who meet certain residency criteria. Families who receive residency preference must have at least one member who lives or works in Fresno County, or who has received an offer of employment in Fresno County. A family with one member enrolled in an institution of higher learning in Fresno County is also eligible for residency preference. The FH also utilizes a US Veteran’s Preference criterion which gives offers additional preference in the application process to active members of the military, veterans and surviving spouses. The FH will also assign preference status, on a limited basis, to homeless persons/families, followed by families displaced as result of natural disaster, code enforcement initiative, public improvement or development, domestic violence, hate crime, or law enforcement cooperation. This limited preference status requires a referral and verification – typically from a government agency – of the family’s condition. Local preference is determined at the time of the full application process. Families on an FH interest list are ranked by the number of points they receive during the application process. Those families who have received the same number of points during the application process are then selected randomly to participate in the full application process. Residency preference weights the family’s FH application by 15 points. The veteran’s preference weights the application by another 10 points. Tenant screening is a critical part of the application process to ensure the well-being of housing authority residents, staff and property. First, tenant screening requires that the family applying for housing meet certain criteria regarding family composition, citizenship, income, suitability, debt to other housing authorities, and current or past criminal activities of household members. Applicants undergo criminal background checks such as FBI fingerprinting, DOJ Lifetime Sex Offender registration, and other municipal and state criminal database searches. The criminal histories of 127 all family members may be considered for eligibility. At the time of the applicant’s criminal background check, the FH also collects credit reports and eviction reports. The FH assesses applicants on their ability to fulfill important responsibilities as a tenant. Assessments include the ability to pay rent in a timely manner, demonstrate care for the unit, its appliances, and all facilities, and to cooperate with others’ rights to peaceful enjoyment of their homes. The FH also examines whether the applicants have a history of criminal activity or alcohol abuse that disrupts the peaceful enjoyment of a home, sex offenses, fraud, bribery, manufacture of methamphetamine, or other forms of deceit or non-compliance with law enforcement. All applicants must demonstrate the ability and willingness to follow the terms of their lease. If needed, the FH may complete a home visit at the applicant’s current residence to ensure their suitability with FH. Home visits are triggered when a landlord abstains from referring an applicant or addresses suitability concerns, when information on the application is inconsistent from credit or rental reports, when the applicant claims to have zero income, when a criminal background check raises concerns, or when an FH interviewer raises concerns about suitability due to the applicant’s statements or behavior during the interview. The FH also screens for drug-related activity, violent criminal activity or other threatening or criminal sexual conduct within the last 5 years. Applicants may be denied housing for a range of reasons, particularly reasons which are crime- related. A denial must occur if a family member has been convicted of manufacturing methamphetamine on housing authority grounds, has been convicted of a drug related crime within 3 years, or has patterns of illegal substance abuse within the past 3 years. Housing is also denied to those on lifetime sex offender registries, or those involved in violent criminal activity within the past 5-7 years. Housing may also be denied where the applicant displays patterns of difficulty paying rent, disturbing neighbors, or has previously been removed from federal housing. The FH may consider mitigating circumstances with applicants where applicants have achieved successful rehabilitation or modification of past behaviors or have received successful counseling or treatment for past behaviors. 128 CHAPTER 8. HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 19% of the American population reported having a disability in 2010. Research has found an inadequate supply of housing that meets the needs of people with disabilities and allows for independent living. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development identified that approximately one third of the nation’s housing stock can be modified to accommodate people with disabilities, but less than 1% is currently accessible by wheelchair users.57 Identifying and quantifying existing accessible housing for all disabilities is a difficult task because of varying needs associated with each disability type. People with hearing difficulty require modifications to auditory notifications like fire alarms and telecommunication systems while visually impaired individuals require tactile components in design and elimination of trip hazards. Housing for people that have difficulty with cognitive functions, self-care, and independent living often require assisted living facilities, services, and staff to be accessible. APPROXIMATELY 13.5% OF FRESNO’S RESIDENTS HAVE A DISABILITY, COMPARED TO 12.7% OF THE REGION’S POPULATION. AMBULATORY DIFFICULTIES ARE THE MOST COMMON TYPE OF DISABILITY IN FRESNO, AFFECTING 7.1% OF THE CITY’S RESIDENTS. Modifications and assisted living arrangements tend to pose significant costs for the disabled population, which already experiences higher poverty rates compared to populations with no disability. Studies have found that 55% of renter households that have a member with a disability have housing cost burdens, compared with 45% of those with no disabilities.58 Residential Patterns In the City of Fresno, an estimated 61,006 persons 5-years-old and older have a disability. This figure represents 13.5% of the total population. People aged 18-64 have the highest disability rate at 7.8%. Disabled seniors 65 and over make up 4.4% of the total population, while children with disabilities make up 1.3% of the population. Rates of disability in the region are lower for children and adults aged 18-64. However, there is a slightly higher percentage of disabled seniors in the region, where this group represents 4.7% of the population. Ambulatory difficulties are the most common type of disability in Fresno, affecting 7.1% of the city’s population. Cognitive and independent living difficulties are the next most prevalent, affecting 5.8% and 5.4% of the population. Smaller percentages of the population are affected by hearing difficulties (3.7%), vision difficulties (3.2%), and self-care difficulties (3%). The 57 Chan, S., Bosher, L., Ellen, I., Karfunkel , B., & Liao, H. . L. (2015). Accessibility of America’s Housing Stock: Analysis of the 2011 American Housing Survey. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: Office of Policy Development and Research. 58 America's Rental Housing 2017. (2017). Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. 129 population with disabilities is well dispersed throughout Fresno, although there is a slightly greater concentration of children with disabilities in the MacLane neighborhood west of the airport. Adults aged 18-64 and seniors with disabilities are dispersed evenly throughout the city. In the region, children, adults and seniors with disabilities tend to live in cities such Selma, Reedley, Parlier, Sanger, Kerman and Coalinga, and in parts of Fresno County near west Fresno and Firebaugh. TABLE 21. DISABILITY BY TYPE Disability Type City of Fresno Fresno Region # % # % Hearing difficulty 16,712 3.7% 31,270 3.7% Vision difficulty 14,563 3.2% 23,661 2.8% Cognitive difficulty 26,383 5.8% 42,299 5.0% Ambulatory difficulty 16,712 7.1% 31,270 6.7% Self-care difficulty 13,707 3.0% 23,733 2.8% Independent living difficulty 24,354 5.4% 41,042 4.8% Note: All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region. Source: ACS TABLE 22. DISABILITY BY AGE GROUP Age of People with Disabilities City of Fresno Fresno Region # % # % Age 5-17 with disabilities 5,871 1.3% 9,358 1.1% Age 18-64 with disabilities 35,294 7.8% 58,242 6.9% Age 65+ with disabilities 19,841 4.4% 39,557 4.7% Note: All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region. Source: ACS 130 FIGURE 49. PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY BY AGE IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 131 FIGURE 50. PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY BY AGE IN THE FRESNO REGION 132 Accessible Housing Supply and Affordability The HUD Resource Locator identifies seven Section 202 properties in Fresno with some accessibility features; the sites are primarily designed for seniors but may also permit younger adults with disabilities. Stakeholders also identified Arbor Court as a 19-unit development specifically designed for persons with physical disabilities. A point-in-time search for wheelchair- accessible apartments for rent using the Apartments.com site returned 220 units, however, only eight of those advertised rents under $1,000 per month. The site’s search feature identified only four wheelchair-accessible units restricted specifically for low-income households and search criteria for accommodations other than wheelchair accessibility were not available. Based on standard Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments in California of $943 per month (equating to an affordable monthly rent of $283 or less), it is highly likely that people with disabilities who are unable to work and rely on SSI as their sole source of income face substantial cost burdens and difficulty locating affordable housing. Publicly supported housing is often a key source of accessible and affordable housing for people with disabilities, and in the study area, these subsidized housing options are much more likely to contain households with at least one member with a disability than the housing stock in general. Table 23 shows the types of publicly supported housing that persons with disabilities are able to access. Data in Table 23 also provides insight into which programs are more likely to provide disabled individuals with housing. TABLE 23. DISABILITY BY PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING PROGRAM CATEGORY Housing Type People with a Disability City of Fresno Fresno Region # % # % Public Housing 87 13.0% 128 12.9% Project-Based Section 8 465 22.2% 480 19.3% Other Multifamily Housing 18 18.4% 19 6.4% HCV Program 1,650 16.2% 2,034 16.2% Note: The definition of “disability” used by the Census Bureau may not be comparable to reporting requirements under HUD programs. Source: ACS Supportive housing, a typically subsidized long-term housing option combined with a program of wrap-around services designed to support the needs of people with disabilities, is another important source of housing for this population. Unique housing requirements for people with an ambulatory difficulty may include accessibility improvements such as ramps, widened hallways and doorways, and installation of grab bars, along with access to community services such as transit. For low- and moderate-income households, the costs of these types of home modifications can be prohibitive, and renters may face particular hardships as they could be required to pay the 133 costs not just of the modifications, but also the costs of removing or reversing the modifications if they later choose to move. Zoning and Accessibility Fair housing laws do not preempt local zoning laws but do apply to municipalities and local government units and prohibit them from making zoning or land use decisions or implementing land use policies that exclude or otherwise discriminate against protected persons. This includes a local government’s affirmative obligation to provide reasonable accommodations to land use or zoning policies when such accommodations may be necessary to allow persons with disabilities to have an equal opportunity to use and enjoy housing. It also includes the affirmative obligation not to segregate housing for protected classes into lower-opportunity, less desirable areas of the jurisdiction. Even where a specific zoning decision does not violate a fair housing law, HUD entitlement communities accept an obligation to set and implement standards and policies that protect and advance fair housing choice for all. The Development Code’s potential effects on accessibility are assessed in this section. Several elements of the analysis that follows refer back to the scored zoning code review presented in Chapter 6. Definition of “Family” and Group Housing for People with Disabilities Often one of the most scrutinized provisions of a municipality’s zoning code is its definition of “family.” Local governments use this provision to limit the number of unrelated persons who may live together in a single dwelling as a means of preserving the stable, traditional, and residential character of their neighborhoods. Unreasonably restrictive definitions may have the unintended consequence (or intended consequence, depending on the motivations behind the drafting of the jurisdiction’s definition) of limiting housing for nontraditional families and for persons with disabilities who reside together in congregate living situations. Fresno’s municipal and development codes do not specifically define family, but rely instead on a definition of “household” and housing occupancy standards to regulate how many unrelated persons may reside together in a dwelling unit. Rather than an arbitrary number of persons, a household is described as one or a group of persons, whether related or unrelated, living together who share the dwelling’s common areas, living expenses, food costs, and utilities, and maintain a single mortgage, lease, or rental agreement. The definition of household is not facially discriminatory against any protected class. Accordingly, Fresno received a “1/low risk” score on Issue 1 because a definition of “family” or “household” is not used or applied in a manner that would treat differently or limit the housing choices of unrelated individuals with disabilities (or members of any other protected class) living together. Regarding housing for persons with disabilities, including those recovering from alcohol or drug abuse, the City received a “1/low risk” score on Issue 2 and on Issue 5 of the matrix. Because the City’s development code permits any number of unrelated persons to dwell together who fit the definition of a “household,” limited only by the housing/ building safety codes, housing for persons with disabilities who also meet the qualities of a “household” should be permitted in the 134 same manner regardless of the number of unrelated persons residing there.59 For other types of housing serving the needs of persons with disabilities, the development code has specific definitions and siting guidelines for “group residential" facilities, “residential care” facilities, and “transitional” and “supportive housing.” Fresno’s Development Code regarding these use types generally follows California’s directives under the state Health and Safety Code (which preempts local zoning rules) to protect housing for persons with disabilities from exclusionary zoning criteria. State law (HSC §§1500 et seq.) requires that licensed community care facilities serving six or fewer persons be: (1) treated as a residential use, (2) allowed by right in all residential zones, and (3) treated the same with respect to regulations, fees, taxes, and permit processes as other residential uses in the same zone, whether or not the facility actually functions as equivalent to the local jurisdiction’s definition of “family” or “single housekeeping unit.” Occupancy of these facilities or dwellings is limited only by building code requirements. This protection applies to community care facilities for persons with disabilities, to residential care facilities for the elderly (§§ 1569.84 et seq.), to alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities (§§ 11834.22 et seq.), and to congregate care facilities (§§ 1267.16. et seq.). Accordingly, under the Development Code, “residential care facilities-limited” (those serving 6 or fewer clients) are allowed by right in all zones that allow residential uses subject to the same development standards and permit processing standards as other residential uses in those zones. “Residential care facilities-general” (providing care for more than 6 persons) are permitted by right in the RM-2 and RM-3 districts and conditionally permitted in the residential single-family districts (RS-1 to RS-5), the RM-1 district, Downtown districts, and in the CMS district. Residential care facilities for seniors (including retirement communities and life care communities) are permitted by right in the RM-2, RM-3, MXD, and Downtown districts, and are a conditional use in the RM-1 and CMS districts. Transitional and supportive housing expressly constitute a residential use and are subject only to those restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same district. As with other types of housing for persons with disabilities, housing that serves the needs of persons recovering from alcohol or drug addiction should be permitted as other single-family residential types as long as the home also meets the criteria of a “household.” State law requires that residential substance abuse treatment facilities for six or fewer residents recovering from alcohol or drug addiction be treated as a “family” and permitted in single family residential zones. The development code makes space for facilities that serve these populations but do not otherwise meet the criteria for its definition of a “household.” The Development Code’s definition of residential care facility expressly includes housing for people in recovery from alcohol or drug addictions. The development code also includes “clean and sober” living facilities under the use category “group residential.” A group residential facility that houses 6 or fewer is classified as a small group residence; a group residential facility for 7 or more residents is classified as a large group residence, and the Development Code’s Permitted Use Table regulates which residential 59 See City of Santa Barbara v. Adamson, 27 Cal.3d 123 (1980) (holding that a group that bears “the generic character of a family unit as a relatively permanent household” is as “entitled to occupy a single family dwelling as its biologically related neighbors”). 135 zones the two types may be sited. Small group residential facilities are permitted by right in all single-family districts, multifamily districts, the Downtown districts, Mixed Use district, and CMS and CR commercial districts. Large group residential facilities are not permitted in the single- family districts but are a conditional use in the multifamily (MR), Downtown, Mixed Use, and CMS / CR districts. Also, residential reentry facilities are a conditional use in the RM districts, CG commercial district, and the Downtown districts. Domestic violence shelters for 6 or fewer residents are permitted in all single-family districts, multifamily districts, and mixed-use districts (excluding the manufactured housing RM-MH district). Shelters for 7 or more domestic violence victims also are permitted in the residential multifamily and mixed-use districts. The development code also makes space for emergency shelters serving persons experiencing homelessness in the RMX mixed use district and the CG commercial district, but no other residential districts. The Department of Justice has taken the position in a recent case against the City of San Jacinto, California that it is unlawful for a municipality to impose numerical occupancy limits on group housing for unrelated persons with disabilities that is more restrictive than numerical occupancy limits for related families or other unrelated persons.60 Because Fresno does not impose a cap on the number of nondisabled, unrelated persons who may occupy a single family residence and be presumed to be living as a single household (other than limits imposed by the housing/building safety codes), the municipality cannot impose a cap or arbitrary limit as an additional zoning requirement on housing for persons with disabilities because of their disability. The state’s rule that licensed group homes and residential treatment facilities of up to 6 residents must be permitted in single family zoning districts does not mean that facilities with more than 6 residents must necessarily be excluded or subject to restrictions not imposed on housing for an equal or greater number of unrelated persons without disabilities. Just as Fresno has chosen the housing/building code as the proper model for regulating occupancy limits rather than an arbitrary number under a “family” or “household” definition, the housing/building code is the proper vehicle for regulating the number of residents in a group home or supportive housing, not the zoning ordinance. The City should be careful in its application of the terms “group residential” facilities, “residential care” facilities, “transitional” and “supportive housing” etc., because persons with disabilities have the same Fair Housing Act protections whether or not their housing is considered to meet a jurisdictions’ use category definitions. As for Issue #4 of the matrix, the Development Code does not regulate concentrations of housing for persons with disabilities or put a quota on the number that may be sited within a certain distance from similar uses. Applications for residential care facilities may be subject to the administrative zone clearance or development permit process, as are other types of residential uses, and will be regulated by the zoning district in which it is located. The City received a “1/low risk” score on this issue. Reasonable Accommodations Adopting a reasonable accommodation ordinance is one specific way to address land use regulations’ impact on housing for persons with disabilities. Federal and state fair housing laws 60 United States v. City of San Jacinto, Civil Action No. 5:12-cv-01966 (C.D. Cal., consent decree June 16, 2014). 136 require that municipalities provide individuals with disabilities or developers of housing for people with disabilities flexibility in the application of land use and zoning and building regulations, practices, and procedures or even waive certain requirements, when it is reasonable and necessary to eliminate barriers to housing opportunities, or “to afford persons with a disability the equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.” Examples of a reasonable accommodation request may be simple such as a modification of the setback or lot coverage requirements to allow an external mobility ramp; modifying existing indoor space for accessible design features; parking changes; allowing more unrelated residents in a group home than the definition of “family” would typically permit; or more complicated like allowing a care home in a particular neighborhood or within a restricted distance to another facility without subjecting the applicant to the costly, time- consuming, and unpredictable special use permit or variance process. The FHAA does not set forth a specific process that must be used to request, review, and decide a reasonable accommodation, and accordingly many local jurisdictions across the country apply their respective zoning code’s variance or special use permit procedure to evaluate and process requests for reasonable accommodation. Variance and special permit procedures are imperfect models for processing reasonable accommodation requests because: (1) they generally require a showing of special circumstances or conditions applying to the land rather than to the individual’s special circumstances or condition due to a disability that affects his or her ability to use and enjoy the dwelling and (2) they subject the applicant to the public hearing process where there is the potential that community opposition based on stereotypical assumptions about people with disabilities and unfounded speculations about the impact on neighborhoods or threats to safety may impact the outcome. California recognized these issues as barriers to housing for persons with disabilities and in 2011, the State Attorney General recommended that cities and counties implement standardized fair housing reasonable accommodation procedures to comply with their affirmative duty to fair housing and to meet the requirements of the Housing Element of the General Plan, which mandates that local governments “remove constraints to, and provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for, intended for occupancy by, or with supportive services for, persons with disabilities.” Fresno adopted a Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance, effective 2016, which may allow an applicant with a disability a modification or exception to the rules, standards and practices for the siting, development, and use of housing or housing-related facilities for equal opportunity to the use and enjoyment of the housing of their choice. The applicant may use a form available from the City or make an oral request to the Director of Planning. Importantly, public notice is not required for consideration of a reasonable accommodation request and private or personal information regarding the nature of an individual's disability will be kept confidential except as needed to make or review the decision. Land use and zoning procedures are typically based on public disclosure and input; however, in the case of a reasonable accommodation request, the evaluation and decision-making process should include safeguards to protect confidential information regarding a person’s disabilities. 137 CHAPTER 9. FAIR HOUSING ACTIVITIES Fair Housing Resources California’s fair housing protections contained within the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) meet or exceed federal standards contained within Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, (the “Fair Housing Act” or “FHA” or “FHAA”). Accordingly, HUD has certified the FEHA as “substantially equivalent” to the substantive rights, procedures, remedies, and judicial review processes of the FHA, which makes California eligible for annual funding through the Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) for fair housing enforcement activities and programs. The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, created by the state legislature and certified by HUD as a participating agency, partners with HUD to enforce federal and state fair housing laws. Under its Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP), HUD also awards grant money to local fair housing advocacy organizations who assist persons believed to have been harmed by discriminatory housing practices; to help people identify government agencies that handle complaints of housing discrimination; to conduct preliminary investigation of claims; to carry out testing and enforcement activities to prevent or eliminate discriminatory housing practices; and to educate the public and housing providers about equal opportunity in housing and compliance with the fair housing laws. For FY 2018, HUD awarded the Fair Housing Council of Central California, which has a multi- county service area including Fresno, a multiyear Private Enforcement Initiatives (PEI) grant of $300,000 to use towards testing and enforcement activities to prevent or eliminate discriminatory housing practices in the California Central Valley region. The Fair Housing council will use its grant to continue the enforcement work of its previous multi-year grant including to increase the number of enforcement actions and referrals made by complainants; discover and remedy discrimination in public and private real estate markets; detect and remedy subtle and sophisticated forms of housing discrimination; reduce the incidence of steering and other practices perpetuating segregation; and increase the number of complaints filed by new immigrants, undocumented persons, and persons with disabilities. The Fair Housing Council also receives an annual grant of funds from the City of Fresno, receiving $40,000 in the 2019 program year to support fair housing outreach and education to ensure fair housing opportunities. Fair Housing Complaints An individual in Fresno who believes he or she has been the victim of an illegal housing practice under the FHA or FEHA may seek assistance from the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) or file a complaint with the appropriate HUD Regional Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) within one year of when the discriminatory practice occurred. Typically, once certified, HUD will refer complaints of housing discrimination that it receives to the 138 state or local FHAP agency for investigation, conciliation and enforcement activities. HUD policy favors having fair housing professionals based locally where the alleged discrimination occurred because it has found that a state or local agency’s closer proximity to the site of the alleged discrimination provides greater familiarity with local housing stock and trends and may lead to greater efficiency in case processing. Because the DFEH is a certified FHAP agency, most complaints filed with the HUD FHEO office will be referred back to the DFEH for investigation and enforcement. The California FEHA provides an alternative procedure to the administrative complaint process. Persons who believe they have experienced housing discrimination may file a pre-complaint inquiry with the DFEH. The Department accepts cases based on possible violations of the FEHA, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, the Ralph Civil Rights Act, the Disabled Persons Act, and the federal FHA under a work-sharing agreement with HUD. If the investigator determines that the complaint meets the criteria for federal dual-filing status, the complaint will be assigned a federal identification number as well. Complaints originally filed with DFEH that are dual-filed with HUD are investigated by DFEH. During the investigation phase, DFEH has the authority to issue subpoenas and take depositions. If the investigation does not show a violation of the law, DFEH will close the case. Before DFEH issues a finding, it may facilitate voluntary dispute resolution through conciliation or mediation. After DFEH issues a merit finding, the opposing parties are required to participate in mandatory dispute resolution. A no-fault resolution can be negotiated at any time during the process. If dispute resolution fails, the DFEH may elect to file a complaint to be heard before the Fair Employment and Housing Commission (FEHC) or in civil court on behalf of the aggrieved complainant. If HUD’s FHEO receives and retains a complaint, it will notify the alleged discriminator (respondent) and begin an investigation. During the investigation period, the agency will attempt through mediation to reach conciliation between the parties. If no conciliation agreement can be reached, the FHEO must prepare a final “Determination” report finding either that there is “reasonable cause” to believe that a discriminatory act has occurred or that there is no reasonable cause. If the agency finds “reasonable cause,” HUD must issue a “Charge of Discrimination.” If the investigator determines that there is no “reasonable cause,” the case is dismissed. If a charge is issued, a hearing/trial will be scheduled before an administrative law judge. The ALJ may award the aggrieved party injunctive relief, actual damages, and impose civil penalties; but unlike federal district court, the ALJ may not impose punitive damages. Administrative proceedings are generally more expedited than the federal court trial process. The advantages of seeking redress through the administrative complaint process are that the DFEH/FHEO takes on the duty, time, and cost of investigating the matter for the complainant and conciliation may result in a binding settlement. However, the complainant also gives up control of the investigation and ultimate findings. Unlike an employment discrimination case, it is not necessary for an aggrieved party to exhaust all administrative remedies before filing a housing discrimination lawsuit in court. Persons wishing to file a lawsuit directly in court may bypass the administrative process with the Department as they do not need a “right-to-sue” letter from the DFEH. Aggrieved persons retain the right to bring their own civil action within the statute of limitations (generally two years) under either the federal 139 FHA or the FEHA. The respondent in an administrative action also may elect to have the administrative proceeding terminated and the case instead adjudicated in federal court. The Department of Justice will prosecute the case on behalf of the aggrieved party. Additionally, the DOJ may bring suit on behalf of individuals based on referrals from HUD in the case of a “pattern or practice” of discriminatory actions, a case of particular importance to the public interest, or when there has been a breach of a conciliation agreement. An aggrieved party may intervene in any action filed by the DOJ. Though the FHA and FEHA are not identical, they are congruent, and accordingly California courts have historically been guided by both state and federal law in deciding claims of housing discrimination. “FEHA in the housing area is thus intended to conform to the general requirements of federal law in the area and may provide greater protection against discrimination.” Brown v. Smith, 55 Cal. App. 4th 767, 780 (1997). If an individual has evidence that his/her rights under the FHA or California FEHA have been violated in a final land use or zoning decision, the aggrieved person may file a complaint with the state DFEH or with HUD, or file a lawsuit directly in state or federal court within the statute of limitations period. HUD refers matters involving the legality of state or local zoning or other land use law or ordinance to the Department of Justice for further enforcement. Housing discrimination claims may be brought against local governments and zoning authorities and against private housing providers to protect the housing rights and interests of aggrieved individuals and families impacted by discrimination, local civil rights advocacy groups on behalf of protected classes, and the Department of Fair Employment and Housing or DOJ to protect the public interest. Complaints Filed with HUD Region IX of the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) receives complaints by households regarding alleged violations of the Fair Housing Act for cities and counties throughout California (as well as Arizona, American Samoa, Guam, Hawaii, and Nevada). The mission of the FHEO is to eliminate housing discrimination, promote economic opportunity, and achieve diverse, inclusive communities. To achieve this mission, the FHEO receives and investigates complaints of housing discrimination, and leads in the administration, development, and public education of federal fair housing laws and policies. The San Francisco Regional Office of the FHEO maintains data reflecting the number of complaints of housing discrimination received by HUD, the status of all such complaints, and the basis/bases of all such complaints. The office responded to a request for data regarding complaints received affecting housing units in the City of Fresno for the period January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2019. The complete data table provided by HUD is included as an appendix to this report with the HUD case file number, violation city, filing date, closure date, basis of complaint, issues cited, closure reason, and monetary relief provided. During this time, HUD received a total of 76 formal complaints of alleged housing discrimination occurring within Fresno. As of the date of reporting, 140 seven of the 76 cases remained open and the other 69 had been closed. The number of complaints filed does not necessarily reflect the true number of acts of unlawful discrimination that may have occurred during the recent 5-year period as, on the one hand, some incidents go unreported and, on the other hand, cases may result in a “no cause” determination if HUD’s investigation reveals a lack of evidence of unlawful conduct. In 46% of the closed cases reported (32 of 69 cases), HUD made a “no cause” determination. TABLE 24. HUD COMPLAINTS BY CLOSURE REASON Fresno – Complaints by Closure Reason Closure Reason 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Complainant failed to cooperate 0 1 1 2 0 4 Complaint withdrawn by Complainant after resolution 1 3 1 4 0 9 Complaint withdrawn by Complainant without resolution 1 0 1 0 2 4 Conciliation / settlement successful 6 0 3 5 6 20 “No Cause” determination by HUD 5 9 10 3 5 32 Total Complaints Filed 13 13 16 14 20 76 Source: FOIA Request to HUD Region IX Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Twenty of the cases have been successfully settled through HUD’s conciliation and settlement process. In the cases resolved by settlement / conciliation, the respondents did not necessarily admit liability, but may have settled to avoid further expense, time, and the uncertainty of litigation. No monetary or equitable damages that may have been awarded to the complainant in those cases were reported by HUD. 141 TABLE 25. HUD COMPLAINTS BY BASIS Fresno – Complaints by Basis Basis 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Color 1 1 3 0 1 6 Disability 3 7 7 10 15 42 Familial Status 5 2 2 0 0 9 National Origin 0 1 1 0 3 5 Race 6 5 8 3 3 25 Religion 0 0 0 0 0 0 Retaliation 2 2 2 1 4 11 Sex 3 1 0 0 1 5 Total Bases Alleged* 20 19 23 14 27 103 Total Complaints Filed 13 13 16 14 20 76 Source: FOIA Request to HUD Region IV Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity * More than one basis of discrimination may be cited in a single complaint More than one basis of discrimination may be cited in a single complaint. Disability was the most often cited basis of discrimination, occurring in approximately 55% of filed cases. Race was the second most often cited basis of discrimination, cited as a factor in nearly 33% of filed cases. Of the 76 cases received and processed by HUD for housing in Fresno, disability was cited as the basis of discrimination in 42 cases, followed by race in 25 cases; retaliation in 11 cases; familial status in 9 cases; color in 6 cases; national origin in 5 cases; and sex in 5 cases. Complainants also may cite more than one discriminatory act or practice, recorded as the discriminatory issue. Discriminatory terms, conditions, privileges, or services and facilities was cited in 42 cases; failure to make reasonable accommodation was cited in 34 cases; discriminatory refusal to rent was cited in 31 cases; discriminatory acts under Section 818 (coercion, etc.) was cited in 15 cases; discriminatory advertising, statements and notices was cited in 13 cases; discrimination in terms/conditions/privileges relating to rental was cited in 7 cases; discriminatory refusal to rent and negotiate for rental was cited in 5 cases; other discriminatory acts was cited in 4 cases; discriminatory financing (includes real estate transactions), otherwise deny or make housing unavailable, and discriminatory refusal to negotiate for rental were cited in 2 cases each; and discrimination in terms/conditions/privileges relating to sale and discriminatory refusal to sell and negotiate for sale were cited in 1 case each. 142 Complaints Filed with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing The Department of Fair Employment and Housing’s statutory mandate is to protect the people of California from employment, housing, and public accommodations discrimination, and hate violence and human trafficking. To accomplish this mission, the Department receives, investigates, conciliates, mediates, and prosecutes complaints of alleged violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Unruh Civil Rights Act, Disabled Persons Act, Ralph Civil Rights Act, Trafficking Victims Protection Act, and statutes prohibiting discrimination in state- funded activities and programs. The state’s fair housing law includes additional classes of persons protected from housing discrimination that are not necessarily protected by the federal FHA: gender identity and gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, age, source of income, genetic information, retaliation for protesting illegal discrimination, or “any other basis prohibited by Section 51 of the Civil Code,” which also includes as a basis of protection medical condition, citizenship, primary language, and immigration status. A complainant alleging he or she has experienced housing discrimination based on one of these additional protected classes, would not find relief by filing a complaint with HUD but instead would need to file the complaint with the state’s DFEH under state law protections. A request was submitted to the DFEH for data reflecting the number of housing discrimination related complaints received by the Department regarding housing units in Fresno for the previous five-year period (approximately November 1, 2014, through November 31, 2019). The DFEH reported that it had received and processed 21 formal complaints of housing discrimination originating within the jurisdiction of the City of Fresno. Of those, the DFEH dismissed 15 cases (71%) after a “no cause” finding; two cases were withdrawn by the complainant without resolution; two cases were conciliated/settled successfully; one case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; and one was settled by the Dispute Resolution Division (DRD) after voluntary mediation. The complete data table provided by the DFEH is included as an appendix to this report with the respondents’ business name and address, filing date, closure date, basis of complaint, and alleged harms experienced. 143 TABLE 26. DFEH COMPLAINTS BY BASIS: 2014-2019 Fresno – Complaints by Basis Basis Total Ancestry 2 Color 4 Disability 6 Engagement in Protected Activity 1 Familial Status 3 Marital Status 1 National Origin 1 Other 2 Race 6 Sex/Gender 1 Sexual Orientation 1 Source of Income 3 Total Bases Alleged* 31 Total Complaints Filed 21 Source: DFEH * More than one basis of discrimination may be cited in a single complaint Disability and race again were the most often cited basis of discrimination, followed by color, familial status, and source of income. The state’s data response also included the alleged “harms” (equivalent to the discriminatory “issues” under HUD’s data system) experienced by the complainants: denied reasonable accommodation was cited in six cases; “other” was cited in six cases; “evicted” was cited in five cases; “harassed” was cited in four cases; Denied rental/lease/sale was cited in three cases; subjected to discriminatory statements/advertisements was cited in four cases; subjected to restrictive rule/ covenant was cited in four cases; denied equal terms and conditions was cited in two cases; and subjected to discriminatory zoning/land use was cited in 1 case. 144 Complaints Filed with the Fair Housing Council of Central California The Fair Housing Council of Central California, located in Fresno, uses FHIP and other funding it receives, including an annual allocation from the City of Fresno’s CDBG funds, to investigate complaints of housing discrimination and predatory lending; promote integrated neighborhoods and equal housing opportunities; and offer mediation, counseling, advocacy, research, and fair housing training services for housing seekers and housing providers. FHCCC maintains a Discrimination Log with data regarding zip code, ethnicity, and gender from calls it receives from residents reporting possible discrimination claims. For the period July 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018, FHCCC logged 243 calls; for the period January 1, 2019, through June 1, 2019, FHCCC logged 265 calls. Of those calls, 140 complaints for the period July 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018, and 103 complaints for the period January 1, 2019 through June 30, 2019, were processed for further investigation and / or enforcement efforts. TABLE 27. FHCCC COMPLAINTS BY BASIS JULY-DECEMBER 2018 Fresno – Complaints by Basis July 2018 – Dec. 2018 Basis Number Issue Number Color 38 Rental 89 Disability 25 Sales Familial Status 5 Advertising National Origin 23 Lending/Red Lining Race 39 Insurance Religion Zoning Retaliation Accessibility 25 Sex / Gender 3 Terms and Conditions 89 Other* 7 Harassment 6 Source: Fair Housing Council of Central California * Other State violations include marital status, source of income, sexual orientation, age, arbitrary class discrimination. 145 TABLE 28. FHCCC COMPLAINTS BY BASIS JANUARY-JUNE 2019 Fresno – Complaints by Basis Jan. 2019 – June 2019 Basis Number Issue Number Color 21 Rental 102 Disability 38 Sales 1 Familial Status 7 Advertising National Origin 8 Lending/Red Lining Race 21 Insurance Religion Zoning Retaliation Accessibility 38 Sex / Gender 1 Terms and Conditions 88 Other* 7 Harassment 12 Source: Fair Housing Council of Central California * Other State violations include marital status, source of income, sexual orientation, age, arbitrary class discrimination. Complainants may describe more than one basis of discrimination or issue in their complaint alleging an unlawful treatment in housing. For data collected for the second half of 2018, race, color, disability, and national origin were the most-often cited bases of discrimination. FHCCC opened 89 cases of alleged discrimination in rental housing, with 89 complaints also citing discriminatory terms and conditions, and 25 cases involving accessibility for persons with disabilities as the discriminatory issue. For data collected for the first half of 2019, race, color, disability, and national origin again were the most-often cited bases of discrimination. For January 2019 through June 2019, 102 cases involved rental housing and 1 case involved for-sale housing. Discriminatory terms and conditions was an issue cited in 88 of those cases, and accessibility for persons with disabilities was cited in 38 cases followed by harassment in 12 cases. FHCCC, reported that for the second quarter of 2018, it referred 5 cases to HUD for further action and 4 cases to private attorneys for assistance with pursuing claims; for the fourther quarter of 2018, it referred 3 cases to private attorneys; for the first half of 2019, it referred 4 cases to HUD for further action and 3 cases to private attorneys. In 2019, FHCCC conducted paired testing on the basis of race in the Fresno real estate market with the target area being all availble new home developments. Twenty-four paired tests, in new home listings and existing homes for sale, were conducted throughout existing neighborhoods in the City of Fresno.The overall paired systemic testing indicated discriminatory treatment of protected testers (African-Americans) in 37% of cases. Testers experienced discrimination 33% 146 of the time in new home developments and in 40% of cases in existing homes in established neighborhoods. The executive director of FHCCC reports that these are alarming results that require more fair housing training and accountability for developers and real estate agents in the Fresno market. Fair Housing Lawsuits and Litigation For the five-year period January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2019, several noteworthy lawsuits have been litigated regarding alleged housing discrimination practices affecting fair and affordable housing in Fresno or the region: a HUD negotiated settlement targeting unfair lending practices by California mortgage lenders; a federal fair housing lawsuit against providers of emergency shelter housing for women; and two state court lawsuits against local jurisdictions seeking to compel compliance with their obligations under their respective General Plans and Housing Elements to provide affordable housing and services to disadvantaged groups. • [Redacted] v. Benchmark Communities, LLC, FHEO Case No. 09-16-5484-8 (Title VIII) (HUD Conciliation Agreement entered March 7, 2017). HUD facilitated a settlement agreement resolving accusations of unfair lending practices between a complainant and three California mortgage lenders, American Financial Network of Brea in Orange County, Benchmark Communities of Fresno, Brigantino Enterprise of Hollister, and also a Benchmark employee. The complainant filed a housing discrimination complaint with the FHEO in 2016 alleging he was unfairly denied an opportunity to pre-qualify for a mortgage loan based on his perceived Hispanic national origin, which precluded him from purchasing a home in Hollister. Equal access to credit for qualified individuals, regardless of their national origin or other protected status, is an important element of fair housing. Benchmark agreed to provide annual fair housing training to employees who interact with prospective homebuyers. American Financial agreed to train current and new employees and pay the complainant $5,000 in damages. • McGee v. Poverello House, Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-00768 (E.D. Cal. 2018). Four individual plaintiffs filed suit against Poverello House and Naomi’s House—two nonprofit organizations that provide meals, social services, and temporary shelter in downtown Fresno to persons experiencing homelessness—raising claims under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA), and negligent infliction of emotional distress and right to privacy violations. (A separate claim under the California Unruh Civil Rights Act was dismissed by the Court). The complaint detailed allegations of sexual harassment by a transgender individual (identified in pleadings as D.N.) who was described as dressing and identifying as a woman but remaining anatomically male. The plaintiffs further alleged that staff failed to take action to protect their privacy and safety, and even threatened them with expulsion if they refused to shower with D.N. The defendant shelters receive federal grant funding through HUD, which requires them pursuant to the Equal Access Rule to provide services to transgender clients based on their gender identity. 147 This case is scheduled to be heard in 2020, but a severe shortage of federal district judges and staff in the Eastern District could delay resolution of this case for years unless the parties reach a settlement. • Martinez v. City of Clovis, Case Number 19CECG03855 (Fresno Cnty Sup. Ct., file date Oct. 23, 2019). Petitioners, two women who each rely on supplemental income and Housing Choice Vouchers, filed suit against the City of Clovis alleging that the city is intentionally not complying with California’s housing law and is discriminating against low-income people by not accommodating high density housing developments in violation of state and federal fair housing laws. Petitioners seek a writ of mandate from the Fresno Superior Court to compel the City to comply with the state’s Housing Element Law—which requires cities and counties to develop plans every eight years designating land for development of housing that accommodates all income groups, including the jurisdiction’s share of its regional housing assessment targets—by rezoning adequate parcels of land within the jurisdiction to accommodate the unmet housing needs of low- income residents desiring to find adequate, affordable housing in the City. Petitioners also seek declaratory relief and an injunction against the City and its officials to cease their discriminatory housing practices. The City has so far disputed the Petitioners’ assertions and has claimed it is in full compliance with affordable housing regulations. It conceded that the state’s Housing and Community Development (HCD) department decertified the City’s Housing Element of its General Plan in 2018 because of a shortfall of parcels zoned to accommodate lower income housing, but claims that it has taken sufficient action (e.g., rezoning to permit multifamily housing in the public facility district and creating a new Regional Housing Needs Assessment overlay zone) to bring the city back into compliance with the state’s housing law. Indeed, in March 2019, HCD re-certified the City’s Housing Element A case management conference has been scheduled for later in February 2020, and a hearing for arguments on the City’s demurrer (objections) on April 14, 2020. • Comunidades Unidas por un Cambio v. County of Fresno, Case Number 18CECG04586 (Fresno Cnty Sup. Ct., file date Dec. 28, 2018). Comunidades Unidas por un Cambio (Communities United for Change) with the assistance of nonprofit Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability, filed an action against Fresno County and its Board of Supervisors seeking to enforce the County’s obligations under its General Plan and Housing Element to facilitate the development and maintenance of affordable housing and to address the needs of disadvantaged unincorporated communities (specifically for clean water and functioning sewer services, stormwater drainage, and other infrastructure). The lawsuit outlines multiple deadlines the County has missed for accommodating affordable housing and improving infrastructure and other needs in historically disadvantaged communities. Plaintiffs allege that the County’s failure to comply disproportionately impacts Latinos and other minority groups and deprives them of the opportunity to live in decent, quality affordable housing and healthy and complete neighborhoods. 148 The County asserted that it is currently in the midst of a revision and update to the general plan that will include elements that address some of the purported concerns of the Plaintiffs. The County also contends that Plaintiffs’ suit is premature because the County should be given more time to complete the action items and programs identified in its General Plan, and also argues that the deadlines and HCD guidelines that Plaintiffs claim the County has failed to meet are nonbinding. A hearing is scheduled for February 7, 2020, to hear arguments from the opposing sides regarding Plaintiff’s Writ of Mandate. Past Fair Housing Goals and Related Activities Fresno’s 2016 Analysis of Impediments identified public and private sector impediments to fair housing. The AI offered several recommendations for addressing the impediments, which are listed below: Administrative Impediments • Need to promote active public participation and involvement on issues impacting city residents. • Lack of use of the state fair housing system. Recommendations provided in the 2016 Analysis of Impediments • Establish an initiative, in partnership with local organizations and advocacy groups, to identify ways to promote public participation in housing and community development planning. Such organizations may include Stone Soup, the Center for New Americans, and the school districts, among others. • Create a “meeting in a box” that will allow agencies to hold meetings at different times and locations and provide feedback to City. • Through continuing contract with the Fair Housing Council of Central California (FHCCC) and collaboration with the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing, disseminate fair housing information through city events, workshops, and local media. • Include a web page on the city website detailing the rights and responsibilities of city residents under federal and state fair housing law, and hyperlinks to a variety of fair housing resources, including complaint forms for HUD and the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing. • Include data-sharing provisions in future contracts with the Fair Housing Council to receive fair housing complaints and testing data. • Open a dialogue with the Fair Housing Council: the purposes of this dialogue would be to share the results of the current AI study and to identify ways in which the city can collaborate with the Council on addressing the impediments included in the study. • Through continuing contract with the Fair Housing Council of Central California, provide fair housing services that include advertising fair housing laws and complaint procedures in multiple languages through literature displays at City and County offices and through local non-profit groups. 149 Spatial Impediments • Persistence of concentrated areas of poverty with disproportionate shares of racial/ethnic minorities. • Concentration of assisted housing in concentrated areas of poverty with relatively high concentrations of racial/ethnic minority residents. Recommendations provided in the 2016 Analysis of Impediments • Identify methods by which CDBG funding may be used to promote investment and leverage lending in areas of the city with high poverty and high concentrations of racial/ethnic minority residents in 2000 and 2010-2014. • Expand or reallocate CDBG funding for infrastructural improvements, public works projects, and housing rehabilitation/preservation, focusing on areas of poverty and high concentrations of minority residents. • Create enhanced infrastructure financing districts (EIDF) in distressed areas around the city center, with the goal of securing additional redevelopment funding for those areas. • Advocate and facilitate the conservation and rehabilitation of substandard residential properties by homeowners and landlords. • Continue to facilitate access to rehabilitation programs that provide financial and technical assistance to low- and moderate-income households for the repair and rehabilitation of existing housing with substandard conditions. • Work with the Fresno Housing Authority to raise housing payment standards for Housing Choice Vouchers to expand housing choice for low-income residents in areas with higher housing costs and lower concentrations of subsidized units. • Open a dialogue with affordable housing developers to identify barriers to entry for construction outside of areas in which affordable units are currently concentrated. • Encourage the Fresno Housing Authority to provide mobility counseling to voucher recipients. • Actively pursue funding to assist in the development, preservation, and rehabilitation of any existing housing type with a particular emphasis on the development of mixed-income neighborhoods. • Ensure that all development applications are considered, reviewed, and approved without prejudice to the proposed residents. Financial/Affordability Impediments • Black and Hispanic home purchase loan applicants have been denied home purchase loans at a higher rate than white or non-Hispanic residents. • Relatively low levels of private investment in racial/ethnic minority neighborhoods and areas with comparatively high poverty rates. • Discrimination in the home sales market on the basis of race and ethnicity. Recommendations provided in the 2016 Analysis of Impediments • Convene a panel of banks and advocacy organizations, such as the Greenlining Coalition, to develop recommendations on how to promote lending in areas with relatively high concentrations of racial/ethnic minority residents 150 • Promote credit and personal finance education among high school students in areas with high concentrations of black and Hispanic students, focusing on the effective use of consumer debt and methods to build and maintain good credit. • Continue to explore opportunities for potential partnerships with non-profit entities to support the development of a land bank or community land trust to acquire properties for rehabilitation and/or development of affordable and mixed-income housing. • Consider funding, matching funds, training programs and Section 3 opportunities for small business loan investment, and to prepare small businesses for loans, in areas with high concentrations of racial and ethnic minority residents and households living in poverty. • Continue to explore development of a Transit Oriented Affordable Housing Loan Fund, which could pool local, state, federal, and private Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) sources to support mixed-income housing in areas with high concentrations of minority residents and households living in poverty. • Publicize the results of the Fair Housing Council’s recent study as part of the fair housing outreach and education efforts the City will undertake to address impediments identified above. • Partner with the Fair Housing Council to provide additional fair housing testing and related enforcement actions. Discriminatory Impediments • Failure to make reasonable modification or accommodation. • Low use of available fair housing resources/infrastructure. Recommendations provided in the 2016 Analysis of Impediments • Conduct outreach and education to area landlords, in partnership with local and state organizations such as the California Apartment Association, relating to reasonable accommodation requirements under the Fair Housing Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, and other related legislation. • Include information relating to the ADA, and fair housing more generally, among licensing materials for new landlords. • Conduct accessibility audits among newly constructed multifamily housing units in partnership with the Fair Housing Council of Central California. • Promote the provision of disabled-accessible units and housing for persons with mental and physical disabilities. • Accommodate persons with disabilities who seek reasonable waiver or modification of land use controls and/or development standards pursuant to procedures and criteria set forth in the Development Code. • Build and maintain a database of housing units that have been rehabilitated and modified for accessibility and make the list available to organizations working to house residents with disabilities. • Include a web page on the city website detailing the rights and responsibilities of city residents under federal and state fair housing law, and hyperlinks to a variety of fair housing resources, including complaint forms for HUD and the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing. • Use CDBG to fund specific Fair Housing education and outreach in areas of concentration. 151 • Through continuing contract with the Fair Housing Council of Central California, provide fair housing services that include advertising fair housing laws and complaint procedures in multiple languages through literature displays at City and County offices and through local non-profit groups. 152 CHAPTER 10. IDENTIFICATION OF IMPEDIMENTS Described below are the fair housing impediments identified in this Analysis of Impediments, along with associated contributing factors. Contributing factors are issues leading to an impediment that are likely to limit or deny fair housing choice or access to opportunity. Recommended activities to address the contributing factors are provided in Table 29, along with implementation timeframes and responsible parties. Impediment 1: Lack of Safety Net Programs for Renters Increases Housing Instability Among Protected Classes Safety net and early intervention programs are critical needs for persons at risk of homelessness. Programs that provide emergency rent or relocation assistance can safeguard families against eviction. The report Evicted in Fresno found that while rent burden and poverty are significant factors in determining when an eviction will occur, evictions in Fresno are more prevalent in areas where populations are predominantly Hispanic, Asian and Black. When researchers tested the adequacy of existing local rent assistance programs, they found that providers either served exclusive groups of recipients, e.g. married couples or members of the Christian faith only, or were severely underfunded. The report noted that one program estimated it turned away between 20-50 families per week who were seeking rental assistance. Given that the report found there were approximately 45 evictions per week in Fresno in 2016 (2,342 total), additional supports to safety net and early intervention programs could significantly reduce the number of evictions throughout the city, particularly in predominantly non-white neighborhoods where residents are hardest hit by evictions. Multi-lingual early intervention services can also assist families living in substandard housing, who have difficulty advocating for themselves. Stakeholders noted that residents who have limited English proficiency, or who are undocumented, are less likely to complain about substandard housing and face increased housing instability due to their difficulty in advocating for themselves. Materials on tenant’s rights and assistance with substandard housing issues should be made available in several languages, using methods that are culturally sensitive and effective. Impediment 2: Insufficient Employment Supports Leave Residents of Color with Lower Incomes and Limited Housing Choices Opportunity Index data in Chapter 5 points to moderate disparities in labor market engagement (a HUD-defined index based on labor force participation, educational attainment, and employment) and school proficiency among racial and ethnic groups in Fresno. In particular, Hispanic, Black, Asian or Pacific Islander, and Native American populations are more likely to reside in areas with lower levels of labor market engagement and school proficiency and higher levels of poverty. Low levels of labor market engagement and school proficiency drive down wages, thus restricting housing choice and access to opportunity. Combined, the city’s low labor market engagement among protected classes and moderate segregation levels contribute to racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty in Fresno. 153 Place-based strategies allow for the targeting of resources and outreach efforts to areas with high proportions of residents whose housing choices may be limited by low earnings or unemployment. These strategies can be combined with other approaches focused on closing skills gaps and developing career pathways, increasing job creation and quality standards, and raising the wage floor. Examples of place-based strategies to increase labor market engagement include increasing awareness of high-growth jobs that pay family-sustaining wages and connections to the training necessary to obtain them; expanding public transportation routes, lengthening service hours, and expanding transportation options between areas with high concentrations of low- earning workers; and targeting neighborhoods with high proportions of low-earning workers as priorities for interventions that increase awareness of available subsidies and resources.61 Planning efforts underway in the city and region identify gaps and provide recommendations for increasing labor market engagement and earnings in Fresno, with opportunities ranging from pre- natal and early childhood interventions to adult education opportunities. In particular, the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan (2019) notes that weaknesses in workforce readiness include low educational attainment and lack of credentials as barriers for workers in achieving employment; shortages of skilled workers to meet employment demand; gaps in higher education capacity; low levels of kindergarten readiness; insufficient access to quality healthcare for mothers and families of color; and insufficient access to programs and services through early childhood, which impacts growth and development into adulthood. Efforts to address these gaps are vital to improving labor market engagement among protected classes in Fresno and thus to increasing housing choice and economic mobility in the city. Impediment 3: Continued Need for Neighborhood Infrastructure Development and Expanded Access to Opportunity in Areas of Concentrated Poverty A lack of access to neighborhood infrastructure and opportunity in areas of concentrated poverty presents additional barriers to fair housing in Fresno. Disparities exist among the city’s neighborhoods with regard to access to quality schools; parks and environmental quality; streets and sidewalks; and grocery stores and other retail establishments. Neighborhoods with higher proportions of white residents tend to have greater access to opportunities relative to those with higher proportions of other racial and ethnic groups. Overall, moderate levels of segregation in the city combined with low levels of access to needed infrastructure and amenities in areas of concentrated poverty contribute to fair housing concerns. Data presented in chapter 5, including maps and input from meetings, interviews, focus groups, and the community survey, indicate that neighborhoods with high poverty levels and those with higher proportions of residents of color tend to have lower levels of access to neighborhood infrastructure and opportunity: • The School Proficiency Index indicates disparities in access to quality schools among racial and ethnic groups in Fresno and shows that white residents have greater access to quality schools than residents of other racial and ethnic groups. 61 Nelson, M., Wolf-Powers, L., & Fisch, J. (2015). Persistent low wages in New Orleans’ economic resurgence: policies for improving earnings for the working poor. In The Data Center. (2015). New Orleans Index at 10. 154 • When asked whether a variety of community resources are provided equally in the city, 60 percent of respondents noted that parks and trails are not equally provided; 52 percent noted that grocery stores and other shopping are not equally provided; and 48 percent indicated that roads and sidewalks are not equally provided. • The City’s Parks Vision Plan finds that approximately half of Fresno’s residents do not live within walking distance of a park and that areas of the city with high poverty rates and with higher proportions of residents of color tend to also contain neighborhood amenities in poor condition or to lack park space altogether. • Environmental health data further indicate that brownfields and toxic sites are more commonly located in these neighborhoods as well, so that in addition to having lower levels of access to areas of opportunity, residents in high-poverty neighborhoods are also more likely to be within close proximity to environmental health hazards. • Overall, 67 percent of survey respondents noted ‘neighborhoods that need revitalization and new investment’ as an impediment to fair housing in Fresno, ranking it as the third greatest barrier to fair housing in Fresno, second only to ‘not enough affordable housing for individuals’ and ‘not enough affordable housing for families.’ Together, these measures indicate that a lack of access to quality neighborhood infrastructure in areas of concentrated poverty restrict access to fair housing choice by limiting opportunity for residents living in these areas. As public investment in neighborhood infrastructure such as schools, parks, streets, sidewalks, and environmental quality drives private investment, a lack of public investment poses barriers to residents’ housing choice by creating disparities in access to opportunity across city neighborhoods. To address disparities in neighborhood infrastructure and associated lack of access to opportunity, meeting attendees, survey respondents, and stakeholders interviewed in the course of this planning process emphasized the need for continued investment in neighborhoods with high concentrations of poverty. Respondents rated street, road, and sidewalk improvements and homeless and domestic violence shelters as the greatest public facility and infrastructure needs, followed by community parks, gyms, and recreational fields. Further, to address these geographic disparities in investment in Fresno, there is a need to approach planning and investment decisions with an equity lens and to further engage communities in areas of concentrated poverty regarding community needs and priorities. Impediment 4: Poor Housing Conditions Limit Housing Options for Some Protected Classes Concerns regarding the poor condition of existing rental housing stock in some areas of the city, together with the difficulties faced by disabled and elderly homeowners in maintaining their homes, were frequently raised among the stakeholders and members of the public who contributed to this AI. In the community survey conducted along with this AI, “help for homeowners to make housing improvements” and “rehabilitation of rental housing” were the second and fourth (respectively) highest-ranked housing needs in the city. Multiple participants cited landlords’ failure to maintain their properties as a primary cause of poor rental housing conditions. In these cases, landlords were said to be letting their properties fall into disrepair and refusing to make necessary improvements or making only minor, “band aid” fixes. This issue has a disproportionate impact on the city’s lowest-income households (frequently 155 households of color) who cannot afford the cost of moving, let alone the cost of higher-quality housing elsewhere. Undocumented tenant households who reside in substandard rental properties seldom have viable options to have their housing quality concerns addressed. Pointing problems out to their landlord could result in retaliation; reporting deficiencies to code enforcement could result in the property being condemned and the tenant family becoming homeless. Other times landlords make minimal corrections to satisfy code enforcement but do not address overarching problems with housing quality. For these and many other reasons, many housing conditions go unreported and undetected, leaving low-income and immigrant households with few alternative housing choices. Other stakeholders and meeting attendees suggested the City’s investment in homeowner rehabilitation assistance is insufficient to meet the need. People with disabilities and the elderly struggle to make home repairs themselves and, due to limited incomes, are often unable to afford contractors to perform needed work. The City could do more with its entitlement funding by focusing more resources on substantial home repair programs rather than cosmetic issues such as exterior painting. Funding housing rehabilitation and new construction, particularly as an infill option in existing neighborhoods, should help to address poor housing quality in Fresno. Programs to assist people with disabilities with the costs of accessibility modifications to their properties could also improve housing quality and extend the usefulness of the existing housing supply. Impediment 5: Racial Disparities Limit Access to Homeownership for Some Protected Classes Many households desire homeownership as a housing option in order to build equity and increase stability. However, homeownership rates and data regarding home mortgage applications indicate significantly more barriers to purchasing a home for households of color, particularly African American and other race households, than for white households in Fresno. About 62% of white households in the city own their homes, while homeownership rates for other racial and ethnic groups range from 27% for African Americans to 38% for Latinos to 53% for “other race” households. Similar disparities exist in Fresno County, where white households are 2.3 times as likely to own their homes than are Black households. While many factors such as income, wealth, and credit history impact homeownership, data examined in this report provide evidence that white households are both more likely to apply for mortgages, more likely to complete their mortgage applications, and more likely to see their applications approved than other racial and ethnic groups. Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data shows that all other racial and ethnic groups are more likely to be denied a mortgage loan than are white applicants, regardless of income. The most notable disparity is between white and African American applicants. At low and middle incomes, Black applicants are 1.5 times as likely to be denied a loan as white applicants; at high incomes, they are 2.2 times as likely to be denied. The City can address these disparities using a variety of approaches. Any homeownership programs supported by the City through either CDBG or HOME (for example, production of new, for-sale units using HOME funds) should be affirmatively marketed to communities of color, including residents with limited English proficiency, in Fresno. The City could also explore opportunities for partnership with a local housing counseling agency to connect participants of 156 other City programs with homebuyer counseling, when appropriate. In addition to working with prospective homebuyers, the City can conduct outreach to lenders, encourage them to collaborate in achieving the City’s goals for affirmatively furthering fair housing, or consider implementing a more formal responsible lending program. Impediment 6: Publicly Supported Housing Options Are Concentrated Outside of Areas of Opportunity Northwest and northeast Fresno appear to limit a variety of affordable housing options, particularly those offered by the Housing Authority of the City of Fresno (FH). Traditional public housing developments, LIHTC developments, Project Based Section 8, Sections 202 and 811 housing, and housing choice vouchers are either extremely limited or non-existent in NW and NE Fresno, where the population is predominantly white. Instead, publicly supported units are primarily located in census tracts with non-white majorities. Hispanic, Black, and Asian households make up 87% of all City of Fresno voucher holders and 71% of residents receiving project based rental assistance. Despite FH’s use of housing navigators to help housing choice voucher users exercise more mobility, stakeholders observe that vouchers continue to be concentrated in 2-3 primary neighborhoods. According to FH staff, approximately 50% of voucher holders successfully find rental units, down from an 80% success rate around the year 2000. The lack of affordable housing in northwest and northeast Fresno has the effect of excluding both low-income racial and ethnic minorities, as well as low-income white residents, from areas of opportunity. The City of Fresno and its housing partners should expand access to affordable housing and neighborhood opportunity by working to locate additional affordable units in NW and NE Fresno. In addition to siting decisions by housing providers, NIMBYism in north Fresno may have historically been a strong contributing factor to the lack of publicly supported housing options in these neighborhoods. Impediment 8 more directly addresses NIMBYism and other community attitudes as an additional barrier to fair housing. Impediment 7: Many Communications and Marketing Efforts Regarding Fair Housing Are Not Effectively Targeted to Protected Classes and Non-English Speakers Fresno has multiple populations with limited English proficiency (LEP) and diverse racial, ethnic, and immigrant populations with varying cultural customs, traditions, and communication styles. One in six Fresno residents primarily speaks a language other than English. Spanish-speakers comprise 70% of the LEP population and Hmong-speaking residents make up 12%. The top languages spoken by other LEP residents include other Indic languages (such as Urdu, Bengali, and Punjabi) and Laotian. While the City has worked to engage these LEP communities by providing translations of information when needed and by making interpreters available for public meetings, residents who attended community meetings suggested that there are opportunities for the City to improve on its strategy through an ongoing, relationship-based approach. Offerings of translation and interpretation tend to be one-way communication options – a way for the City to make residents aware of information rather than a means of engaging LEP residents in dialogue. These types of 157 approaches are also most commonly employed on the City’s terms (i.e. when the City wishes to announce information or collect input) but may not be as available to residents at other times. A more inclusive public engagement model depends upon building ongoing relationships within LEP communities, often with a designated liaison who builds trust over time between the LEP population and the City staff. The liaison participates in regular events within the community, listens to concerns and criticism and is a conduit between these communities and the City. This liaison will then understand and be able to design culturally appropriate approaches to involving LEP residents in the full spectrum of government processes, opening an ongoing, two-way avenue for exchange of information and ideas. Enhancing the City’s strategies for engaging with its LEP communities makes City government, planning processes, and decision-making more responsive to the input of LEP communities and increases the access of non-English-speakers to public resources, including fair housing information. Impediment 8: NIMBYism and Prejudice Reduces Housing Choice for Protected Classes While Impediment 6 discussed affordable housing siting decisions by the City and its partners, this impediment addresses community attitudes that inhibit housing options for protected classes, including racial and ethnic minorities and immigrants. Public input indicated that attitudes and perceptions about multifamily housing, affordable housing, and homelessness in Fresno impact housing development and housing choice. Many stakeholders interviewed for this research noted that developing multifamily housing – affordable or market rate – in north Fresno is difficult due to pushback and Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) sentiments expressed by some residents. In addition, some stakeholders noted that, as people of color or south Fresno residents, they would not feel comfortable moving to a neighborhood in the northern part of the city, even if they desired to move and housing was available, because of likely mistreatment and/or racism by some neighbors. In general, stakeholders tended to perceive the city as segregated and noted that housing discrimination is likely occurring. Other stakeholders noted discrimination by neighbors against members of the LGBTQ community. One-fifth of survey respondents reported experiencing housing discrimination in Fresno, and 73% believe housing discrimination is an issue or is somewhat of an issue in the city. Impediment 9: Individuals Not Understanding Their Housing Rights May Prevent Access to Fair Housing Knowledge of fair housing rights and resources is generally good in Fresno relative to many other jurisdictions in the country. Many public meeting attendees and stakeholders who were interviewed for this research knew of one or more appropriate organizations in the region who assist with fair housing issues, including Central California Legal Services, the Fair Housing Council, and HUD. However, some stakeholders noted that while social service and housing agency staff have knowledge of fair housing resources, the general public is likely to be less informed about them. In the survey conducted as part of this AI, 93% of respondents reported that they know or somewhat know their fair housing rights, although about 38% would not know where to file a housing discrimination complaint. The number of calls and complaints processed by the Fair 158 Housing Council of Central California also speaks to need for ongoing education and enforcement efforts. In the second half of 2018 and first half of 2019, FHCCC logged 508 calls resulting in 243 complaint investigations. Future fair housing education efforts should ensure that Fresno’s most vulnerable groups are aware of available resources, including people of color, immigrants, residents with limited English proficiency, people with disabilities and LGBTQ populations. Another key component of future fair housing education and enforcement efforts should be informing voucher holders and landlords/property managers about California’s recently enacted law prohibiting refusal to accept a Section 8 voucher. Stakeholder input indicates that prior to this law going into effect on January 1, 2020, many landlords would not take vouchers and they would be unaware of the law or unwilling to comply voluntarily once the law took effect. 152 TABLE 29 – FAIR HOUSING GOALS AND ACTIVITIES Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 1: Lack of Safety Net Programs for Renters Increases Housing Instability Among Protected Classes Evictions affect low-income and severely rent burdened residents at high rates. • Create an Emergency Rent and Relocation Demonstration Program. a. The City should create a demonstration program or partner with an existing non- profit to provide emergency rent assistance and legal assistance to tenants on the verge of eviction. (Q3, 2021) • Capture and monitor eviction data within the jurisdiction in order to develop future policy solutions for managing evictions in target areas. (Q1, 2021) • As patterns emerge from eviction data, the City should identify, research and adopt additional anti-displacement policies that are not covered under AB 1482. (Q3, 2021) City of Fresno Limited English Proficiency and Immigration status create additional barriers to quality housing • Address substandard housing and other fair housing issues through the City’s Immigrant Affairs Committee. a. The City should partner with a local community organization to create and distribute materials in various languages regarding tenants’ rights and ways to obtain assistance with substandard housing issues. (Q4, 2020) City of Fresno 153 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 2: Insufficient Employment Supports Leave Residents of Color with Lower Incomes and Limited Housing Choices Educational and employment barriers limit economic opportunities • Continue working with partners on funding and implementation of the economic development, human capital, and neighborhood development strategies contained in the Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • As described in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan, work with community partners to raise funds to remove financial barriers to training for Fresno residents and to remove barriers to employment. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • As described in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan, work with community partners to form a regional coordinating entity that connects educators, industries, workers, and students to provide high-quality, paid work-based learning for all learners in the Fresno region. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • As described in the Greater Fresno Regional Drive Plan, work with community stakeholders to increase the scale of 1:1 workforce navigator programs, focusing on target populations in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Provide vouchers for public transportation and alternative transportation options to support low-income individuals in obtaining and maintaining employment. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Invest in wrap-around services to support homeless individuals in obtaining and maintaining employment in addition to accessing housing and other needed services. (Ongoing, beginning, 2020) • Work with local adult / continuing education providers and job search assistance agencies to better identify barriers their students / clients face. Consider opportunities to use CDBG funding to address potential barriers and locating services in low- and moderate-income census tracts. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Target neighborhoods with high proportions of low-earning workers as priorities for interventions that increase awareness of available subsidies and resources. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Direct any economic development subsidies to companies paying living wages and engaging in local hiring. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Continue providing CDBG or other funding for youth education enrichment activities to encourage reading proficiency, high school completion, career and/or college preparation, and other education components, including full-day programs to support parents in maintaining employment in low- and moderate-income census tracts. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) City of Fresno 154 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 2 (continued): Insufficient Employment Supports Leave Residents of Color with Lower Incomes and Limited Housing Choices Low levels of kindergarten readiness; insufficient access to programs and services through early childhood; and insufficient access to quality healthcare for mothers and families of color • Provide CDBG or other funding for youth education enrichment activities and other early childhood programs and services to encourage kindergarten readiness, reading proficiency, and other aspects of child growth and development. (Ongoing) • Provide CDBG or other funding to support access to quality healthcare, with a focus on quality care for low-income mothers and families of color. (Beginning Q1, 2021) City of Fresno 155 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 3: Continued Need for Neighborhood Infrastructure Development and Expanded Access to Opportunity in Areas of Concentrated Poverty Continued need for neighborhood reinvestment in low- and moderate-income census tracts • Continue to fund projects that develop, expand, or improve sidewalks, parks, trails, and other public facilities in low- and moderate-income census tracts with high need for these improvements (see, e.g., neighborhood amenity gaps mapping in the Fresno Parks Vision Plan). (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Consider implementing mechanisms to increase and make consistent funding for parks and other infrastructure improvements in low- and moderate-income census tracts. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Target investment of CDBG funds in RECAPs. (Ongoing) • As described in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan, work with community partners to form a coalition to implement complete streets improvements and plan for equitable Transit-Oriented Development in south and west Fresno. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) City of Fresno Areas of the City are underserved with regard to access to services, grocery and other neighborhood- oriented retail • Continue City promotion of Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Tracts as Opportunity Zones for the purpose of attracting businesses. (Ongoing) • Continue to provide economic development support such as infrastructure assistance for new small businesses that fill market niches and create jobs. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • As described in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan, develop a Neighborhood Loan Fund focused on increasing availability of capital to underserved populations using a peer-lending strategy, with a focus on south and west Fresno. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • As described in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan, develop a revolving loan fund that will provide low-interest financing for new businesses; existing businesses looking to adapt, improve, and expand their operations; and property owners trying to make their building lease-ready. Focus efforts on south and west Fresno. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) City of Fresno 156 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 3 (Continued): Continued Need for Neighborhood Infrastructure Development and Expanded Access to Opportunity in Areas of Concentrated Poverty Equity issues are not routinely and consistently considered in planning and policymaking • Create an office of equity and inclusion to review policy and budget decision impacts on RECAPs and neighborhoods of color. (2021) • Develop an evaluation tool focused on maximizing equitable outcomes for use in review of development and policy decisions (e.g. the King County Housing Development Consortium’s Racial Equity Impact Tool). (Q3, 2020) • Develop an equity assessment tool to prioritize locations for investment in public infrastructure and facilities (e.g., Seattle’s Equity and Environment Agenda and Environmental Equity Assessment Pilot; NYC Parks Framework for an Equitable Future). (Q3, 2020) • Train City staff in use of these tools to ensure incorporation into City decision-making processes. (Q4, 2020) • Publicly track progress on equity issues, including metrics detailed in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE plan (e.g., City of Philadelphia Greenworks Dashboard). (Q3, 2020) • As the City’s General Plan is routinely updated, staff in the respective CDBG program offices should review the proposed housing element updates and comment to planning staff on any concerns related to equity of planning policies or development plans. (Ongoing, beginning Q3, 2020) City of Fresno Need to further engage communities in south and west Fresno in planning decisions • Expand community engagement efforts focused on community needs and priorities in south and west Fresno, including working with residents and community groups to shape the City’s approach to community engagement. As detailed in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE plan, implement targeted outreach to engage with end users to identify areas for investment. (Ongoing, beginning Q2, 2020) • Focus community engagement and dialogue in part on the role of race/ethnicity and economic mobility in Fresno. (Q3, 2020) City of Fresno 157 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 4: Housing Options for Some Protected Classes Are Limited by Poor Housing Conditions Landlords in some neighborhoods fail to adequately maintain and improve rental properties • Continue to monitor the effectiveness of the City’s new Rental Housing Improvement Program and revise program standards and procedures as may be needed to keep the program working successfully, to maintain enforcement, and to ensure rental properties are enrolling as required. (Annually, beginning Q4 2020) • Consider a rental rehabilitation program that would provide incentives to landlords to maintain their rental properties in good repair. (Q1 2021) • With input from code enforcement officers and homeless service providers, develop a protocol for ensuring tenant households reporting code violations are protected from homelessness as a result of displacement from substandard housing pursuant to code enforcement action. (Q3 2021) City of Fresno Low-income households, including the elderly and people with disabilities, have difficulty making needed home repairs • Continue using HUD funding to support housing rehabilitation programs; consider focusing resources on substantial and necessary repairs that will extend the useful life of the housing rehabilitated. (Ongoing, beginning Q3 2020) • Work with the nonprofit community to support programs that assist people with disabilities with the cost of accessibility modifications to their homes. (Annually, beginning Q1 2021) City of Fresno 158 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 5: Racial Disparities Exist in Access to Homeownership Lower shares of African American and Latino households apply for home mortgage loans than white households • Ensure that opportunities to participate in City of Fresno homebuyer opportunities, including those operated by Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs) and funded through CDBG and HOME money, are affirmatively marketed to people of color, immigrants, and people with limited English proficiency. (Ongoing, beginning Q3 2020) • Facilitate partnerships between local social service and housing agencies, including the Fresno Housing Authority, to connect eligible families with possible homeownership opportunities. (Ongoing, beginning Q1 2021) • Continue exploring educational opportunities focused on building and maintaining credit, personal finances, and the homeownership process. Continue City efforts identified in previous CAPERs to promote credit and personal finance education among high school students. (Ongoing, beginning Q4 2020) • Continue funding development of affordable housing for homeownership through CHDOs and other affordable housing providers using HOME funds. Require subrecipients to affirmatively market available homeownership opportunities to households throughout Fresno, including people of color, immigrants, and people with limited English proficiency. (Ongoing, beginning Q3 2020) City of Fresno People of color, most notably African Americans, are more likely to be denied home mortgage loans than white applicants • Build on recent efforts to bring the banking and lending community to the table to improve mortgage lending outcomes for applicants of color. In recent years, the FHCCC held meetings to review Community Re-Investment Act (CRA) obligations. Continuing this conversation, convene a working group of local bankers to identify collaborative steps the City, lenders, and other local housing agencies could take to both increase the completion rate of loan applications and reduce the denial rates. (Q1, 2021) • Consider/evaluate the need for a responsible banking program that would use distribution of government financial relationships (within banking regulations) to incentivize fair lending by financial institutions. (Q4, 2021) City of Fresno 159 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 6: Publicly Supported Housing Options Are Concentrated Outside of Areas of Opportunity Affordable housing, including publicly supported housing, is limited, particularly in desirable areas where neighborhoods offer enhanced access to some types of opportunity • As outlined in Impediment 3, develop and implement an equity assessment tool to use in review of development and policy decisions to promote a broad view of any proposed multifamily, mixed-income, or affordable housing throughout the city, including in north Fresno. (Q4 2020) • In coordination with statewide housing planning regulations, update the Housing Element of the City’s General Plan to ensure that an appropriate amount of land is zoned for multifamily housing in locations throughout the City. (Q1 2021) a. Consider further housing element and/or development code updates that would encourage alternatives to large lot sizes (such as cluster developments, density blending, zero lot line developments, and transfer of development rights) and up-zone single-family detached districts to increase the density allowed in existing neighborhoods without property owners having to obtain a variance or other special approval. (Q1 2021) • New affordable housing development, whether by the cities with CDBG or HOME funds, the local housing authorities, or private-sector LIHTC developers should be given priority consideration when it will be located in an area that increases access to new types of opportunity not generally available in neighborhoods where existing affordable housing is located. (Ongoing, beginning Q3, 2020) City of Fresno Partners: Housing Authority of the City of Fresno Housing Choice Voucher use is limited in NE and NW Fresno, including many neighborhoods that offer enhanced access to some types of opportunity Education is needed about recent statewide legislation requiring rental housing managers / owners to accept Housing Choice Vouchers • As outlined in Impediment 9, work with partners such as local fair housing agencies, media outlets, and the Fresno Housing Authority to publicize new state requirements regarding accepting Section 8 vouchers to landlords and property managers, with a focus on independent landlords not affiliated with larger property management companies. (Q4, 2020) • As outlined in Impediment 9, work with the Fresno Housing Authority to raise awareness among voucher holders and the general public regarding new requirements regarding acceptance of Section 8 vouchers. (Ongoing, beginning Q2, 2020) City of Fresno Partners: Housing Authority of the City of Fresno 160 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 7: Many Communications and Marketing Efforts Regarding Fair Housing Are Not Effectively Targeted to Protected Classes and Non-English Speakers Limited English proficiency among large segments of Fresno’s population limits opportunities for two-way engagement with the City • The City should begin building the infrastructure for a stronger, more sustainable relationship-based community engagement approach. a. Consider whether existing staff can be devoted to role(s) as liaisons to LEP communities or whether this may necessitate creating a new dedicated staff position (e.g. Eugene, Oregon’s Multicultural Liaison). (Q1 2021) b. Consider opportunities to hold periodic community-wide events for the purpose of engaging with multicultural groups (e.g. Plano, Texas’s Multicultural Outreach Roundtable). (Q1, 2021) c. Consider opportunities to align the development of an enhanced multicultural engagement strategy with the work of the DRIVE initiative. (Q1, 2021) d. Formalize the resulting enhanced engagement strategies in a policy along with guidelines and a listing of tools available to assist with implementation (e.g. Seattle, Washington’s Inclusive Outreach and Engagement Guide) (Q4, 2021) • Provide cultural competency training to all Fresno HCD staff beginning with those in public-facing roles, but expanding to back-office and management as well. (Q4, 2021) City of Fresno 161 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 8: NIMBYism and Prejudice Reduces Housing Choice for Protected Classes Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) attitudes limit multifamily and affordable housing development in North Fresno • Develop and deliver community education around the concept of affordable housing and its cultural and economic value to the community. a. Develop an adaptable slide deck and presentation on the subject of the value of affordable housing, including qualitative and quantitative arguments. (Q1, 2021) b. Establish a small “speakers bureau” of designated city staff or other community partners to deliver the presentation to local groups. (Q2, 2021) • Market the presentation and available speakers to community groups such as neighborhood/homeowners’ associations, Rotary and other similar clubs, and associations of Realtors, homebuilders, and lenders. (Ongoing, beginning Q2, 2021) • Consider conducting a tour of successful affordable housing properties in Fresno for local leaders and other interested parties to build public support for additional affordable housing development. (Q2 2021) City of Fresno Stakeholder input indicated that prejudiced attitudes by some community members impacts housing choice • A broad-based and trusted local convening institution should be enlisted to create and offer a periodic diversity, equity, and inclusion training aimed at local community leaders and other interested parties. One training session could be combined with staff training on the proposed equity assessment tool as a two-part course. (Q2 2021) • Explore options for communitywide events or programing that celebrate Fresno’s diversity and encourage interaction among diverse participants in neighborhoods throughout the city. (Q4 2020) City of Fresno 162 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 9: Continued Need for Fair Housing Education and Enforcement Public input and data on housing discrimination complaint calls and filings indicate that more fair housing education is needed for landlords and lenders • Through a contracted fair housing agency, provide education and outreach to landlords, property owners, property managers, and lenders. (Ongoing, beginning Q2, 2020) a. Work with the agency annually to develop and deliver a fair housing education program that uses innovative ways to reach housing industry professionals on a variety of fair housing topics. b. Continue holding community-wide events, including the Fair Housing Conference, that convenes housing industry professionals to learn about fair housing rights and responsibilities and updated fair housing laws. • Work with partners such as local fair housing agencies, media outlets, and the Fresno Housing Authority to publicize new state requirements regarding accepting Section 8 vouchers to landlords and property managers. Connect landlords with questions regarding the new law to appropriate resources. (Q4, 2020) • Consider requiring landlords or property managers found to be in violation of city codes or other regulations to attend a fair housing training session as part of the requirements to cure the code / regulatory violation. (Q2, 2021) City of Fresno Public input and data on housing discrimination complaint calls and filings indicate that more fair housing education is needed the general public • Through a contracted fair housing agency, annually design and coordinate delivery of a fair housing education program that reaches the public with information about fair housing rights and responsibilities, how to recognize discrimination, and how and where to file a complaint. (Ongoing, beginning Q2 2020) a. Focus on working through local agencies (social service providers, churches, community organizations, etc.) to meet residents in locations where they are comfortable. b. Conduct outreach to local agencies serving immigrants, refugees, and other populations with limited English proficiency to collaborate on approaches to provide fair housing education and enforcement for these groups. c. Work with the Fresno Housing Authority to raise awareness among voucher holders and the general public regarding new requirements regarding acceptance of Section 8 vouchers. • Continue funding a local fair housing agency to accept fair housing calls and investigate complaints. Publicize this agency and how to contact them as part of the fair housing education effort. Review capacity to handle complaints in languages other than English to ensure ability to assist all Fresno residents. (Ongoing, beginning Q2, 2020) City of Fresno 163 APPENDIX A: PUBLIC NOTICES AND CITIZEN OUTREACH Outreach Activities in Support of the November 2019 Workshops and Community Needs Survey • Public notice in the Fresno Bee and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle • Utility bill inserts distributed to 130,000 utility customers in the City of Fresno • Advertisement in CUSD Today (Central Unified School District newsletter) • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers • Digital distribution of flyers to Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools for schools located in the City of Fresno • Project website (www.FresnoConPlanAI.com) logged 818 unique visitors and 994 visits • Facebook posts reached 1,123 individuals and drove 21 engagements • Twitter posts reached 9,652 individuals and drove 45 engagements • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue 164 Public Notice - English PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC MEETINGS FOR COMMUN ITY DEVELOPMENT & FAIR HOUSING STUDY The City of Fresno is developing a 5-Year Consol idated Pl an that will assess the current hOusing market, d iscuss characteristics of th e city's popu lation, identify commun ity improvement priorities, and outl ine a five-year plan to fund and imple ment them. The City receives approximately $11 million each year in funds under the federal Commun ity Development Blo ck Grant (C DBG ), Home Investm ent Partnersh ips Act (HOM E), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG ), and Housi ng Opportun it ies for People with AIDS (HOPWA) programs. The Consol idated Pl an i s required by the U.S. Department of Hous ing and Urban Develo pm ent (HUD) to gu ide how and Where these funds are used over th e com ing five years . A separate study called an Analysis of Imped iments to Fair Housing Choice (Al) will also be conducted to identify barriers to equal access to hOusing and ne igh borhood opport un it ies . The A l will set pol icy recommendations to help ensure that Fresno's neighborhoods are inclus ive and free from baniers that restrict residents' access to opportun ities like transportation, jobs , and schools . The opinions and perceptions of local residents are an important part of th is study. All residents are invited to attend a publ ic meeting and participate in a survey. The meeting details are below. Refreshments will be served, and ch ild ren are welcome . Saturday, No vem ber 2 10:30am -11 :30am Teague Elementary School 4725 N. Po lk Avenue Fresno, CA 93722 Monday November 4 6:30pm -7:30pm Vang Pao Ele mentary School 41 oo E. Heaton Avenue Fresno, CA 93702 Monday,November4 6:30pm -7:30pm Pi nedale Elementary School 7171 No rth Sugarpine Fresno, CA 93650 Tue sday Novem ber 5 6:00pm -7:00pm Webster Elementary School 2600 E. Tyler Avenue Fresno, CA 93701 Monday, November 4 6:00pm -7:00pm Kirk Ele mentary Sehool 200 0 E. Belgravia Avenue Fresno, CA 93706 Tuesday November 5 6:30pm -7:30pm Centenn ial Elementary School 3830 E. Sag inaw Way Fresno, CA 93726 Mo re information about the Consol idated Plan and Analysis of Imped iments, includ ing a link to the survey, as anothe r avenue for prov id ing input, is available at www .FresnoConPl anAl.com . Project updates will be posted to the website, and drafts of the reports will be available in early 2020 . If, as an attendee at a meeti ng , you need accommodations such as interpreters, signers, assistive li sten ing devices, or the servi ces of a translator, please contact Ald i Dodds at (559) 621-8512 or ald i.dodds@fresno .gov . To ensure ava ilabil ity, you are adv ised to make the request at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. 165 Public Notice - Spanish NOTIFICACION PUBLICA REUNIONES P UBLICAS PARA E L ESTUDIO DE VIVI ENDAJ USTA Y DES ARROLLO COMUNITARIO La Ciudad de Fresno esta desarro ll ando un Plan Consol idado de 5 anos que eva luara el mercado de vivienda actua l, discutira caracteristicas de la poblacion de la ciudad, identificara las prioridades de mejoram ien to de la comun idad y de lineara un plan de cinco aiios para financ iar1o e implement arlo. La ciudad rec ibe aproximadamente $ 11 mill ones en fondos todos los anos bajo los programas federales de Subvenc ion en Bloque para el Desarrollo Comun itario (CDBG}, Asociac ion para lnversiones en Vivienda (HOM E), Subvenci on para Soluciones de Emergencia (ESG), y Oportu nidades de Vivienda para Personas con SIDA (HOPWA). El Depart amento de Vivienda y Desarro llo Urbano de EE .UU . (HUD} requ iere el Plan Conso lidado para dirigir como y donde se utilizaran esos fondos durante los proximos ci nco anos. Tambien se Hevara a cabo un estud io separado llamado Ana li sis de lmped imentos en la Selecc ion de Vivienda Justa (Al} para iden tif ica r barreras a la igua ldad de acceso a la vivienda y oportunidades de vecindario. El A l est ablecera recomendac iones de po liza para ayuda r a garantizar que los vecindarios de Fresno sean inclusivos y esten l ibres de barreras que restrinjan el acceso de los residen tes a oportun idades como el transporte, el trabajo y la escue la. Las opiniones y percepciones de los residen tes locales constit uyen una parte importan te de este estud io. Se invita a todos los residentes a asistir a una reu nion publ ica ya participar en la encuesta . Los deta ll es de la reun ion figuran a con tinuacion . Se serviran re frigelios y los ninos son bienven idos. Sabado 2 de noviembre 10:30am -11 :30am Teague Elementary School 4725 N. Pol K Avenue Fresno, CA 93722 Lunes 4 de noviembre 6:30pm -7:30 pm Vang Pao Elementary School 4100 E. Heaton Avenue Fresno, CA 93702 Lunes 4 de noviembre 6:30pm -7:30pm Pi nedale Elemen tary School 7171 North Sugarpine Fresno, CA 93650 Martes 5 de nov iembre 6:00pm -7:00pm Webster Element ary School 2600 E. Tyler Avenue Fresno, CA 9370 1 Lu nes 4 de noviembre 6:00pm -7:00pm KirK Element ary School 200 0 E. Belgravia Avenue Fresno, CA 93706 Martes 5 de noviembre 6:30pm -7:30pm Centennial Elemen tary School 3830 E. Sag inawWay Fresno, CA 93726 Encontrara disponible mas inforrnac ion acerca del Pl an Consolidado y del Ana li sis de lmped imentos, inclu ido un en lace para la encuesta , as i como otra via para propo rciona r aportes en www .FresnoConPlanAl.com . Las actualizaciones del proyecto se publicaran en el sitio web, y los borradores de los informes est aran dispon ibles a princ ipios de 2020. Si, planea asisti r a las j untas y necesita adapt aciones como interpre tes. interpretes de lenguaje de signos, dispos itivos de ayuda aud itiva o los servicios de un traductor, por favor, pongase en con ta cto con Aldi Dodds al telefono (559} 62 1-85 12 o a la direccion de internet aldi.dodds@fresno .gov . Para garantizar la dispon ibilidad , se le recom ienda rea lizar la sol icitud al menos 48 horas ant es de la reu nion . 166 Utility Bill Inserts – English, Spanish, Hmong Utility bill inserts distributed to 130,000 utility customers in the City of Fresno 167 Utility Bill Inserts (Continued) – English, Spanish, Hmong 168 Advertisement 169 Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) 170 Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) - Spanish 171 Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) – Hmong 172 Project Website: www.FresnoConPlanAI.com 173 174 175 176 Social Media - Twitter Social Media – Facebook (separate post for each meeting) 177 Media Calendar Posts 178 Media Calendar Posts (Continued) 179 Outreach Activities in Support of the February 13, 2020 Workshop • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers • Digital distribution of flyers to Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools for schools located in the City of Fresno and sent home with children at select schools near the sites of meetings • Project website (www.FresnoConPlanAI.com) logged 818 unique visitors and 994 visits • Facebook post reached 2,400 individuals and drove 62 engagements • Twitter post reached 2,285 individuals and drove 36 engagements • Nextdoor post reached 9,761 individuals • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients, 12 Community Development Corporations located in the City of Fresno, Central California Legal Services, and Fair Housing Council of Central California • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue. 180 Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) 181 Project Website: www.FresnoConPlanAI.com 182 Social Media – Facebook (separate post for each meeting) Social Media – Twitter 183 Social Media – Nextdoor 184 Email Distribution 185 Digital Flyer Distribution Example 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan and 2020 Annual Action Plan PUBLIC DRAFT – February 2020 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 2 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN For Program Years 2020 to 2024 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN For Program Year 2020 CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA Planning and Development Department Housing and Community Development Division PUBLIC DRAFT – February 2020 Prepared for the City of Fresno by Mosaic Community Planning, LLC Consolidated Plan FRESNO 3 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Revised 3/2/2020 to extend end of public comment period from 3/31/20 to 4/3/20 This is a draft document that has been made available for public review and comment. The Public Comment Period begins February 28 and concludes on April 3. Written comments are encouraged during this time and may be submitted to the City’s Housing and Community Development Division, 2600 Fresno Street (Room 3065); Fresno, California 93721, or via email to HCDD@fresno.gov. Please indicate “Public Comment” in the subject line of email messages. Residents are invited to comment on the draft documents at two upcoming Public Hearings: Wednesday, March 25, 2020 at 5:00 P.M. Public Hearing regarding the Draft Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments Housing and Community Development Commission Meeting Fresno City Hall; 2600 Fresno Street, Room 2120 Fresno, CA 93721 Thursday, April 9, 2020 at approximately 10:05 A.M. Public Hearing regarding the Draft Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments City Council Meeting Fresno City Hall; 2600 Fresno Street, Council Chamber Fresno, CA 93721 If, as an attendee at a meeting, you need accommodations such as interpreters, signers, assistive listening devices, or the services of a translator, please contact (559) 621-8300 or HCDD@fresno.gov. To ensure availability, you are advised to make the request at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 4 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 6 ES-05 Executive Summary - 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b) ...................................................................... 6 THE PROCESS .......................................................................................................................................... 13 PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies 24 CFR 91.200(b) ....................................................................... 13 PR-10 Consultation - 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l) ................................................................................. 15 PR-15 Citizen Participation ......................................................................................................... 22 NEEDS ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................................. 38 NA-05 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 38 NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment - 24 CFR 91.205 (a,b,c) ................................................................. 38 NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) ........................................ 49 NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) ............................ 52 NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens – 91.205 (b)(2) .................................. 56 NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion – 91.205(b)(2)...................................................... 57 NA-35 Public Housing – 91.205(b) ......................................................................................................... 63 NA-40 Homeless Needs Assessment – 91.205(c).................................................................................. 68 NA-45 Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment - 91.205 (b,d) ......................................................... 70 NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs – 91.215 (f) ....................................................... 78 HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................ 85 MA-05 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 85 MA-10 Number of Housing Units – 91.210(a)&(b)(2) ............................................................................. 85 MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing - 91.210(a) .............................................................. 88 MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing – 91.210(a) ...................................................... 93 MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing – 91.210(b) ................................................................................. 100 MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services – 91.210(c) .......................................................................... 103 MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services – 91.210(d) ................................................................... 105 MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing – 91.210(e) ............................................................................... 108 MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets – 91.215 (f) ..................................................... 110 MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion .................................................................................... 120 MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing occupied by Low- and Moderate-Income Households - 91.210(a)(4), 91.310(a)(2) ..................................................................................................................... 124 MA-65 Hazard Mitigation - 91.210(a)(5), 91.310(a)(3) ......................................................................... 127 STRATEGIC PLAN ................................................................................................................................... 129 SP-05 Overview .................................................................................................................................... 129 SP-10 Geographic Priorities – 91.215 (a)(1) ......................................................................................... 130 SP-25 Priority Needs - 91.215(a)(2) ..................................................................................................... 131 SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions – 91.215 (b) .............................................................................. 136 SP-35 Anticipated Resources - 91.215(a)(4), 91.220(c)(1,2) ............................................................... 137 SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure – 91.215(k) ................................................................................ 144 SP-45 Goals Summary – 91.215(a)(4) ................................................................................................. 150 SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement – 91.215(c) ........................................................ 153 SP-55 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.215(h) ................................................................................ 153 SP-60 Homelessness Strategy – 91.215(d) .......................................................................................... 154 SP-65 Lead based paint Hazards – 91.215(i) ....................................................................................... 157 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 5 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy – 91.215(j) ............................................................................................... 157 SP-80 Monitoring – 91.230 ................................................................................................................... 159 EXPECTED RESOURCES ....................................................................................................................... 161 AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.220(c)(1,2) ....................................................................................... 161 ANNUAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................... 166 AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................... 166 PROJECTS ............................................................................................................................................... 169 AP-35 Projects – 91.220(d) ........................................................................................................ 169 AP-38 Project Summary .............................................................................................................. 172 AP-50 Geographic Distribution – 91.220(f) ........................................................................................... 190 AFFORDABLE HOUSING ........................................................................................................................ 191 AP-55 Affordable Housing – 91.220(g) ................................................................................. 191 AP-60 Public Housing – 91.220(h) ........................................................................................................ 192 AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities – 91.220(i) ........................................................ 193 AP-70 HOPWA Goals - 91.220 (l)(3) .................................................................................................... 196 AP-75 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.220(j) ................................................................................. 197 AP-85 Other Actions – 91.220(k) .......................................................................................................... 197 PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................ 200 AP-90 Program Specific Requirements – 91.220(l)(1,2,4) ................................................................... 200 APPENDIX A: PUBLIC NOTICES AND CITIZEN OUTREACH .............................................................. 207 Outreach Activities in Support of the November 2019 Workshops and Community Needs Survey ..... 207 Outreach Activities in Support of the December 2019 Workshops and Community Needs Survey ..... 225 Outreach Activities in Support of the January 2020 Workshops ........................................................... 239 Outreach Activities in Support of the February 13, 2020 Workshop ..................................................... 249 Outreach Activities in Support of Public Comment Period & Public Hearings ...................................... 257 APPENDIX B: CITY OF FRESNO REVISED CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN .................................... 278 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 6 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES-05 Executive Summary - 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b) 1. Introduction Every five years, the City of Fresno must prepare a strategic plan (known as the Consolidated Plan) which governs the use of federal housing and community development grant funds that it receives from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). When preparing a Consolidated Plan, grantees must assess the needs and issues in their jurisdictions as a part of their preparation of these documents. The grant funds received from HUD by the City that are covered by the Consolidated Plan include: • Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program • Home Investment Partnerships Act (HOME) Program • Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Program • Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS (HOPWA) Program. The City must also submit to HUD separate Annual Action Plans for each of the five years during the Consolidated Plan period. The Annual Action Plans serve as the City’s yearly applications to HUD that are required for the City to receive the annual allocations from the four grant programs. These grants from HUD are known as Entitlement Grant Programs because communities receive the funds every year if they meet program requirements and criteria associated with each of the four grants. Under HUD’s grant program regulations, the City of Fresno may use its CDBG, HOME, and ESG grant funds only within the city limits, however, Fresno receives and administers its HOPWA funding for the entirety of Fresno County, known as its “Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area” or EMSA. With its HOPWA funds, the City is required to serve eligible persons living anywhere within the EMSA and not just within city limits. 2. Summary of the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan Needs Assessment Overview When preparing a Consolidated Plan, grantees must assess the needs in their jurisdictions as a key part of the process. To inform development of priorities and goals over the next five years, the Consolidated Plan’s Needs Assessment discusses housing, community development, and economic development needs in the city. It relies on data from the U.S. Census, the 2011-2015 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS), and a special tabulation of ACS data known as Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data that estimates the number of households with one or more housing needs. Local data regarding homelessness and assisted housing is included. Finally, public input gathered through interviews, focus groups, public Consolidated Plan FRESNO 7 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) meetings, and the community survey are coupled with data analysis to identify priority needs related to affordable housing, homelessness, assisted housing, community development, and economic development in Fresno. Comments provided by attendees at the community meetings, stakeholders and citizens who were interviewed are listed in the Citizen Participation portion of this report; an abbreviated list is below: Priority Needs Identified by Participants • Alternative housing models • Low barrier housing/shelter • Housing and programs for people who are homeless or victims of domestic violence • Home repair and rehabilitation • Affordable housing construction • Home purchase assistance • Rental assistance • Employment and job training programs • Education programs • Senior programs and services • Sidewalk improvements • Parks, recreational, and senior facility improvements • Street and curb repair • Incentives for community members who clean/maintain alleyways • Accountability and documentation of funds 3. Evaluation of past performance The City’s most recent CAPER (2018-2019) reported on the City’s performance relative to the previous Consolidated Plan’s goals. Select highlights from the 2018-2019 CAPER are provided below, by goal area. Generally, the City has made good progress toward the goals of its previous Consolidated Plan and as such, the priorities and strategies expressed in this 2020- 2024 Consolidated Plan largely align with the City’s ongoing approach to program implementation. Goal 1: Safe and Affordable Housing • City of Fresno Senior Paint Program: Completed 9 with 9 additional projects to be completed in the PY 2019. • Minor Code Compliance Program: Completed 11, with 1 project pending completion at the end of the PY 2019. • CDBG Rehabilitation Program: 1 project pending completion. Targeted Area Rehabilitation Program: Completed 3. • Habitat for Humanity Senior Paint Program: Completed 13, with 20 projects pending completion. • Self Help Home Repair Program: Completed 2, with 14 projects pending completion. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 8 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Habitat for Humanity Home Repair Program: Completed 2, with 20 projects pending completion. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 9 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Goal 2: Homeless Services • Based on the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) reports provided to the City, 795 persons were provided overnight shelter, 68 units of rapid re-housing and 19 units of homeless prevention were provided during PY 2018. • HOPWA funds were used for supportive services, housing information and referral services, tenant-based rental assistance, and short-term rent, mortgage, and utility (STRMU) assistance to 53 persons. • The City also contracted with the Fresno Housing Authority to provide HOME funding for Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) to 17 at-risk families and households for the prevention of homelessness. Goal 3: Community Services • City of Fresno After School Program: The Parks, Afterschool Recreation and Community Services (PARCS) department operated the City’s after school program and summer FUN Camp, benefitting 712 youth during PY 2018. The afterschool program is offered at ten locations. • City of Fresno PARCS Senior Hot Meals: Weekday meals and programming provided for seniors at seven sites within the city. The program served congregate hot meals and shelf stable meals to 997 seniors. • Boys and Girls Club of Fresno County (B&GC): B&GC utilizes CDBG funds to provide education, job training and recreation for youth ages 6 to 18 at three City park centers located in at-risk neighborhoods experiencing high rates of poverty. During PY 2018, the program served 1,031 youth. • Stone Soup Fresno Job Development Pilot Program: A total of 90 clients were enrolled into the program, and of those, at least 49 attained new part-time or full-time employment or attained wage progression, and 26 completed training or persisted with their training at program end. Goal 4: Public Facilities and Public Improvements • Neighborhood Street Improvements: The Hidalgo neighborhood received new sidewalks, drive approaches, and curb ramps, as well as curb and gutter construction/reconstruction for greater ADA accessibility. • Park Facilities Improvements: CDBG funds providing for capital improvements to parks and recreational facilities serving low- and moderate-income residential areas. The projects include: Romain (challenger course), CA/Tupman (pocket park playground and fencing), Cary Park (lighting installation), design for renovations to various learner pools, Hinton (restroom and field lighting), Granny’s Park (youth modular center), JSK Victoria West (playground and shade structure), Dickey Playground (tot lot replacement) Fink- White (splash park) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 10 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 4. Summary of citizen participation process and consultation process An important component of the research process for this Consolidated Plan involved gathering input regarding housing and community development needs in the Fresno. The project team used a variety of approaches to achieve meaningful public engagement with residents and other stakeholders, including public meetings, focus groups, interviews, a website comment form, and a community-wide survey. Each of these approaches is briefly summarized here, with greater detail provided in the Citizen Participation section of the Plan. Public Meetings Three rounds consisting of a total of 16 public meetings were held to inform residents and other stakeholders of the City’s planning process and to and gather information for Consolidated Plan. The first round of ten meetings was held in early November to introduce the community to the planning process, provide information on ways to get involved, and collect input on housing and community development needs. These public meetings had both Spanish and Hmong interpreters present and were live-captioned to keep the meeting content accessible to participants with disabilities. The City of Fresno held three follow-up meetings in December to engage community members in the prioritization of the highest needs identified in the November meetings and community survey. These meetings utilized a small group breakout format, where each group of 2-4 attendees was facilitated by a City of Fresno staff person allowing for more detailed discussion of needs and issues. Finally, a third round of three public meetings was held in January for the purpose of collecting feedback from residents and stakeholders on a draft set of community priorities. These meetings also used a small group breakout format to collect detailed reactions and recommended revisions to the priorities. In all, 168 people attended the public meetings. Focus Groups In addition to the public meetings, two focus groups were held to collect input from youth and seniors. As with the public meetings, these groups typically began with an explanation of the Consolidated Plan. The focus group leader them facilitated a discussion of fair and affordable housing needs, neighborhood conditions, and community resources in the City of Fresno. The Senior Focus Group included 36 participants and 30 students participated in the Teen/Pre-Teen Focus Group for a total of 66 participants combined. Stakeholder Interviews During the week of November 3, 2019, individual and small group stakeholder interviews were held at locations in Fresno. For people unable to attend an in-person interview, telephone interviews were offered. Stakeholders were identified by City staff and represented a variety of viewpoints including fair housing/legal advocacy, housing, affordable housing, community development and planning, education, employment, homelessness, people with disabilities, and others. Interview invitations were made by email and/or phone to a list of stakeholders compiled by the project team with input from the City of Fresno. A total of 40 stakeholders within the Fresno community participated in an interview with the project team. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 11 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Intercept Interviews A team of City staff conducted intercept interviews at Inspiration Park on a busy Saturday afternoon. The interviewers approached families and individuals as they were picnicking and enjoying the playground with a set of short, informal questions designed to engage residents informally about areas and issues they would like to see improved within the city. In all, 13 residents participated in an intercept interview. Project Website A standalone website specifically for the City’s Consolidated Plan and Analysis of Impediments project was developed and hosted at www.FresnoConPlanAI.com to be both an information resource for the community and to facilitate input and engagement. The project website was continually updated with meeting details, contained a link to the community survey, and offered fact sheets on each of the City’s grant programs. The website received 994 visits from 818 unique users over the course of the project. Three comments were submitted for the project team’s consideration through an online comment form located on the website. Community Survey A final method for obtaining community input was a 29-question survey available to the general public, including people living or working in the City of Fresno or other stakeholders. The survey was available online and in hard copy, in English, Spanish and Hmong, from October to December 2019. Paper copies were available at the public meetings and other related events held throughout the study area. A total of 500 survey responses were received, including four that were completed in Spanish (although 28% of the English version respondents indicated that they live in multi-lingual households). 5. Summary of public comments The City of Fresno will hold a 30-day public comment period and a public hearing to receive input from residents and stakeholders on the draft Consolidated Plan prior to approval by the Fresno City Council and submission to HUD. Comments received during the public comment period will be included in this section when this plan is finalized. 6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them All public comments were accepted and taken into consideration in preparing the Consolidated Plan. 7. Summary This Consolidated Plan describes the City’s priorities for CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funding, including how those resources will be allocated geographically, how the specific projects funded by the City will address these priorities, and the outcomes that can be expected as a result. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 12 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The priorities represent the highest level needs expected to be addressed over the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan period using the City’s grant funds. In summary, the priority needs set by this Consolidated Plan are: 1. Provide assistance for the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless through safe low-barrier shelter options, housing first collaborations, and associated supportive services. 2. Improve access to affordable housing for low‐income and special needs households by partnering with interested developers to increase development of low-income and affordable housing in high opportunity areas, and by promoting the preservation and rehabilitation of existing affordable housing units. 3. Promote quality of life and neighborhood revitalization through improvements to current public infrastructure and facilities, and by closing gaps in areas with aging, lower quality, or nonexistent public infrastructure and facilities. 4. Provide services to low‐income and special needs households that develop human capital and improve quality of life. 5. Provide services to residents and housing providers to advance fair housing. 6. Plan and administer funding for community development, housing, and homelessness activities with improved transparency, increased community involvement, and full compliance with federal regulations. The City of Fresno’s Consolidated Plan preparation coincides with the development of the first year Action Plan and the annual Notice of Funding Available (NOFA) process. The City awards CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funding to non‐profits, public agencies, City departments, and developers that provide public services and housing for low-income and special needs households. It is largely through these partners that the City is able to accomplish progress toward its priority needs. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 13 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) THE PROCESS PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies 24 CFR 91.200(b) Describe agency/entity responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source. TABLE 1 – RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES Agency Role Name Department/Agency CDBG Administrator Fresno City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, Housing and Community Development Division HOPWA Administrator Fresno City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, Housing and Community Development Division HOME Administrator Fresno City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, Housing and Community Development Division ESG Administrator Fresno City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, Housing and Community Development Division Narrative The City of Fresno’s Housing and Community Development Division is the Lead Agency for the City’s United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) entitlement programs. The City of Fresno’s Housing and Community Development Division, within the Planning and Development Department, is responsible for the administration of HUD Entitlements including but not limited to the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG), the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), the Emergency Solutions Grant program (ESG), and the Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS (HOPWA) funding. By federal law, each jurisdiction is required to submit to HUD a five‐year Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plans listing priorities and strategies for the use of federal funds. The Consolidated Plan is a guide for how the City of Fresno will use its federal funds to meet the housing and community development needs of its populations. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 14 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information Tom Morgan Manager, Housing and Community Development Division 2600 Fresno Street CH3N 3064-C Fresno CA 93721 Phone: (559) 621-8064 TTY: (559) 621-8721 Email: HCDD@fresno.gov Consolidated Plan FRESNO 15 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) PR-10 Consultation - 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l) 1. Introduction The City of Fresno utilized a robust public engagement process to develop its 2020-2024 Five- Year Consolidated Plan. Prior to preparing the draft Plans, the City of Fresno hosted 16 public engagement meetings reaching a total of 168 unique individuals, two focus groups, and offered a public survey. A total of 500 people in participated in the survey. Results of these outreach efforts are summarized in the Community Participation section of the Plan. The City of Fresno will hold a 30-day public comment period and two public hearings to receive input from residents and stakeholders on the draft Consolidated Plan prior to approval by the Fresno City Council and submission to HUD. Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(I)). Through ESG funding, the City of Fresno provides support to the Multi-Agency Access Program (MAP), which serves as the FMCoC coordinated intake program for homeless individuals and families in need of services, including physical and mental health, substance abuse and housing needs. Three MAP Points are located within Fresno’s city limits, with the primary point of entry being at the Poverello House, a local non-profit that provides a clinic and shelter. The City of Fresno has also developed a database of over 500 local service providers with whom it can distribute information and coordinate activities throughout various Fresno communities. Local service providers include those providers in the fields of workforce development and community advocacy, as well as businessowners, and public agencies and concerned individuals. Throughout the community engagement period in the preparation of this plan, stakeholders were consistently engaged, updated, and encouraged to participate in the Consolidated Plan process. Stakeholders were asked to promote the outreach activities with their constituents and beneficiaries. Elected leaders, community planners, and public agencies and departments (City, County, and region‐wide) also worked to promote the Consolidated Planning process by updating their social media pages, speaking with residents, and circulating email notifications and flyers. Many of the organizations forwarded the email to their mailing lists and promoted the events to their local partners. In addition to citywide outreach, staff also conducted targeted outreach in lower income, CDBG‐ Eligible communities by distributing flyers at local neighborhood organizations and health centers. City of Fresno staff and partnered organization Helping Others Pursue Excellence (H.O.P.E.) also distributed flyers through a door-to-door effort, engaging citizens in their neighborhoods and encouraging them to attend the meetings and to help spread the word. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 16 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyers and outreach were also conducted door-to-door at affordable housing developments near locations of community meetings. Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness The City of Fresno is a member of the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care (FMCoC). The FMCoC is responsible for coordinating homeless services throughout Fresno and Madera Counties, such as homelessness prevention, outreach to homeless individuals, short and mid- term emergency housing, supportive services and mental and physical healthcare access. Together, the City of Fresno and FMCoC received over $12 million in Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP) and California Emergency Solutions and Housing (CESH) funding to provide homeless services throughout the region.1 Over the period of 2019 to 2021, the city will spend approximately $1.5 million on a triage center, $650,000 on homeless outreach services for families and youth and $100,000 on a work program for homeless individuals.2 Three triage centers will open within Fresno’s city limits, and will be funded either through the City of Fresno or Fresno County. The former Hacienda Hotel in west Fresno will be converted to a 50-bed triage center operated by Mental Health Services, Inc., an FMCoC member. A second triage center, Belgravia, will open in southeast Fresno and will also be operated by an FMCoC member, Turning Point of Central California. Naomi’s House, a women’s triage center, will open in central Fresno and be operated by FMCoC member Poverello House.3 Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS As part of its PY 2019 planning process, the City of Fresno consulted the FMCoC on its ESG program allocation amounts. The City also coordinated with the FMCoC and Fresno County to establish its ESG performance standards in 2011. These standards remain in effect. The Fresno Housing Authority, as the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) Lead for the FMCoC, conducts the Point in Time count and manages data around homelessness. The Fresno Housing Authority, as well as all other members of the FMCoC, utilize the Vulnerability Index assessment tool and the Coordinated Entry System. 1 Calix, B. (2019, February 2). Fresno makes ‘good first step’ to address homeless crisis. Here’s what it includes. The Fresno Bee. Retrieved from: https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article225406375.html 2 City of Fresno, CA. (2019, January 31) City of Fresno Meeting Minutes – Final, City Council. Retrieved from; https://fresno.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=M&ID=662569&GUID=B78C13C6-1EB1-453B-B985-EFD2401C01D1 3 Calix, B. (2019, July 6). Here’s how state money is helping the homeless in Fresno. The Fresno Bee. Retrieved from: https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article232086202.html Consolidated Plan FRESNO 17 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdictions consultations with housing, social service agencies and other entities Representative agencies, groups, and organization that participated in the planning process for Fresno’s 2020-2024 Five-Year Consolidated Plan and 2020 Annual Action Plan are shown in the table on the following pages. In addition to the agencies listed, others may have participated in the online survey, which was anonymous. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 18 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) TABLE 2 – AGENCIES, GROUPS, ORGANIZATIONS WHO PARTICIPATED Agency / Group / Organization Type Section of Plan Addressed Consultation Method 1 Access Plus Capital • Banking, Finance • Market Analysis Interview 2 California Apartment Association • Housing • Housing need assessment Interview 3 Central California Legal Services • Services – legal • Non-homeless special needs Interview 4 Central Valley Regional Center • Services – developmental disabilities • Non-homeless special needs • Housing need assessment Interview 5 City of Fresno Director of Customer Relations & Analytics • Other government – city • Other government – city Interview 6 City of Fresno, Long Range Planning • Other government – city • Other government – city Interview 7 City of Fresno, Transportation Department • Other government – city • Other government – city Interview 8 Disability Advisory Commission • Services – fair housing, people with disabilities • Non-homeless special needs Interview 9 Elder Abuse Services, Inc. • Services - elderly • Non-homeless special needs Interview 10 Fair Housing Council of Central California • Services – fair housing • Non-homeless special needs Interview 11 Fresno Building Healthy Communities • Civic organization • Housing need assessment • Non-homeless special needs Interview 12 Fresno City Council • Other government – city • Housing need assessment Interview 14 Fresno Council of Governments • Other government - regional • Housing need assessment Interview 15 Fresno Housing Authority • Housing • Housing need assessment Interview Consolidated Plan FRESNO 19 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Agency / Group / Organization Type Section of Plan Addressed Consultation Method 16 Fresno Metro Ministry • Services – food, health • Non-homeless special needs Interview 17 Fresno Planning Commission • Other government - city • Housing need assessment Interview 18 Fresno Police Department • Other government - city • Non-homeless special needs Interview 19 Fresno Public Works • Other government - city • Non-homeless special needs • Non-housing community development strategy Interview 20 Highway City Community Development, Inc. • Civic Organization • Housing need assessment Interview 21 Lowell Community Development Corporation • Civic Organization • Housing need assessment Interview 22 Marjaree Mason Center • Services – domestic violence • Housing need assessment Interview 23 Orange Center School District • Services – education • Housing need assessment Interview 24 RH Community Builders • Housing • Housing need assessment Interview 25 Sanger Unified School District • Services – education • Housing need assessment Interview 26 Transform Fresno • Other government - city • Housing need assessment Interview 27 Turning Point of Central California • Housing • Services – homelessness • Housing need assessment • Homeless needs • Homelessness strategy Interview 28 WestCare California, Inc. • Services – health, mental health • Non-homeless special needs Interview Consolidated Plan FRESNO 20 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting Efforts were made to consult as broad a group of community stakeholders as possible. Email notifications and invitations regarding the community meetings and survey were distributed to stakeholders by the City of Fresno. No agency types were excluded from participation. Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan TABLE 3 – OTHER LOCAL / REGIONAL / FEDERAL PLANNING EFFORTS Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan? Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan City of Fresno The Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan covers long range planning topics such as urban form, transportation, natural resources, historical/cultural resources and health and wellness. Specific housing related goals including increasing quality of housing and homeownership, and increased access to health and mental health services are also reflected in the strategic plan. Drive Plan City of Fresno The DRIVE Plan has goals to improve housing affordability and stability, reduce racial and economic isolation and support environmental justice and sustainability, most of which are addressed in the strategic plan. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 21 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan? Fresno Parks Master Plan City of Fresno The Fresno Parks Master Plan includes goals to maintain, improve and expand its existing parks, to include associated recreational facilities; strategic plan. 2015 - 2023 Housing Element City of Fresno The goals of the 2015-2023 Housing Element are for the City of Fresno to meet its RHNA housing requirements, assist in the development of housing for low- income households, remove government constraints on housing development, conserve existing affordable housing and to promote equal housing opportunity, which are shared goals with this strategic plan. Street to Home Fresno County Fresno Housing Authority Street to Home Fresno County identifies solutions to help reduce and ultimately end unsheltered homelessness. Several recommendations focused on affordable housing and resources for survivors of domestic violence align with the goals and priorities identified in the strategic plan. Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness, 2006-2016 Fresno Madera Continuum of Care The FMCoC Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness aims to end homelessness through the collaboration of its Continuum of Care members. Strategies to expand health, mental health, job training and other services, as well as housing, align with the goals and priorities identified in the strategic plan. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 22 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe cooperation and coordination with other public entities, including the State and any adjacent units of general local government, in the implementation of the Consolidated Plan (91.215(l)) The City of Fresno coordinates with the FMCoC and other Continuum of Care member agencies, such as the Fresno Housing Authority, to expand both housing and services for the region’s homeless population. PR-15 Citizen Participation 1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation Summarize citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting The City of Fresno follows the process for public participation that is outlined in the City’s Citizen Participation Plan, which complies with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) citizen participation requirements listed in federal regulation 24 CFR 91.105. The Citizen Participation Plan is designed to ensure resident involvement in the 2020- 2024 Five-Year Consolidated Plan and 2020 Annual Action Plan for community development programs including CDBG, HOME, ESG and HOPWA programs. To obtain input from residents, the City of Fresno began by gathering initial input about priority community development, housing, and homeless needs through ten community meetings, two focus groups, stakeholder and intercept interviews, and a community-wide survey open to residents and other stakeholders. In two subsequent community engagement efforts the City held six meetings to gather feedback on initial engagement results and on draft Consolidated Plan priorities. Dates, time, and locations for the meetings are shown below and results are summarized in the table that follows. Community Meeting #1 Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 10:30 AM Teague Elementary School, 4725 N. Polk Avenue, Fresno, CA 93722 Community Meeting #2 Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 1:00 PM Discovery Center, 1944 N. Winery Avenue, Fresno, CA 93703 Community Meeting #3 Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 3:00 PM Inspiration Park, 5770 W. Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 93722 Community Meeting #4 Monday, November 4, 2019 at 6:00 PM Kirk Elementary School, 2000 E. Belgravia Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 23 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Community Meeting #5 Monday, November 4, 2019 at 6:30 PM Pinedale Elementary School, 7171 North Sugar Pine Avenue, Fresno, CA 93650 Community Meeting #6 Monday, November 4, 2019 at 6:30 PM Vang Pao Elementary School, 4100 E. Heaton Avenue, Fresno, CA 93702 Community Meeting #7 Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 4:00 PM Highway City, 5140 N. State Street, Fresno, CA 93722 Community Meeting #8 Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 6:00 PM Webster Elementary School, 2600 E. Tyler Avenue, Fresno, CA 93701 Community Meeting #9 Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 6:30 PM Centennial Elementary School, 3830 E. Saginaw Way, Fresno, CA 93726 Community Meeting #10 Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 5:00 PM City of Fresno City Hall, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721 Senior Focus Group Monday, November 4, 2019 at 11:30 AM Ted C. WillisWills Community Center, 770 N. San Pablo Avenue, Fresno, CA 93728 Teen/Pre-Teen Focus Group Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 5:30 PM Maxie L. Parks Community Center, 1802 E. California Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706 Public Input Feedback Meeting #1 Monday, December 9, 2019 at 6:00 PM Leavenworth Elementary School, 4420 E. Thomas Avenue, Fresno, CA 93702 Public Input Feedback Meeting #2 Tuesday, December 10, 2019 at 5:30 PM Ted C. WillisWills Community Center, 770 N. San Pablo Avenue, Fresno, CA 93728 Public Input Feedback Meeting #3 Thursday, December 12, 2019 at 6:00 PM Williams Elementary School, 525 W. Saginaw Way, Fresno, CA 93705 Draft Priorities Feedback Meeting #1 Tuesday, January 21, 2020 at 6:00 PM Sal Mosqueda Community Center, 4670 E. Butler Avenue, Fresno, CA 93702 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 24 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Draft Priorities Feedback Meeting #2 Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 6:00 PM Wesley United Methodist Church, 1343 E. Barstow Avenue, Fresno, CA 93710 Draft Priorities Feedback Meeting #3 Thursday, January 23, 2020 at 6:00 PM West Side Seventh Day Adventist Church, 2750 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Fresno, CA 93706 Fair Housing Community Meeting Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 6:00 PM Ted C. Wills Community Center, 770 N. San Pablo Avenue, Fresno, CA 93728 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 25 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) LOCATIONS OF CONSOLIDATED PLAN COMMUNITY OUTREACH EVENTS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 26 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 27 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 28 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Promotional Activities Diverse tactics were utilized to encourage community participation in the community meetings, including: • Utility bill inserts distributed to all 130,000 customers in the City of Fresno for the meetings held in November. • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Social media posts on Facebook, Twitter, and Nextdoor. • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers, and select schools located near sites of community meetings. • Digital distribution of flyers at Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools. • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue. • Public notice in the Fresno Bee and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle for meetings held in November. • Utility bill inserts distributed to all customers in the City of Fresno for the meetings held in November. • Door-to-door canvasing, hanging flyers on doors and engaging with neighborhood residents near the locations of the December and January meetings. • Flyers distributed to apartment complexes location near the sites of December and January meetings. • Flyers distributed at the Christmas Parade for the December meetings, and the Southeast Asian Family Education Conference for the January meetings. • Advertisement in the Fresno Bee for the meetings held in December. • Push notification on the City’s resident service app, FresGo, for the December meetings. • Participation and flyer distribution at community meetings including the El Dorado Neighborhood meeting and the Winchell Elementary School resident meeting promoting the January meetings. • Printed flyers distributed at food distributions and congregations near the site of community meetings, as well as announcements during services for the January meetings. • The El Dorado Park CDC created custom flyers and invited residents attending a local event, and by inviting residents to dinner before the meeting to encourage attendance. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 29 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Citizen Participation Outreach TABLE 4 – CITIZEN PARTICIPATION OUTREACH Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received 1 Community Meetings • Residents, including minority residents, people with limited English proficiency, people with disabilities, and public/ assisted housing residents • Housing and service providers • Community development practitioners 59 attendees Greatest Needs • Improved mix of housing types • Housing rehabilitation citywide, especially for seniors and Southwest Fresno homeowners • Rehabilitation/accessibility improvements to mobile homes • First-time homeowner programs • Funding to help low-income homeowners construct/convert ADUs • Housing for the elderly and people with disabilities • Housing for young people who are struggling with debt • Infrastructure support for housing density, affordable housing • Infill housing in Southwest Fresno • Homelessness prevention and rapid rehousing • Street outreach to people who are homeless • Low-barrier shelters as a short-term link to transitional housing • Dorm-style housing, tiny homes for people who are homeless • Rental readiness and landlord damage insurance program • Safe places/services for homeless people living in cars or tents • Proactive code enforcement in Southwest Fresno and emergency housing if needed while homes are repaired • Community maintenance in South Fresno – pothole repair, tree trimming, lawn mowing • Safe routes to school, sidewalks, crosswalks, street lighting, school zone and school crossing signage, speed bumps • Information and application assistance for people living with HIV and AIDS to access medication • Youth job programs/job training • Facility and internet improvements at Boys and Girls Clubs • Facility improvements at parks and community centers, including Maxie Parks and Frank H Ball • Reduced cost or free transit for people who are homeless or on Consolidated Plan FRESNO 30 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received fixed incomes • Improved safety and police response times in Tower District • Drainage improvements in Tower District • Improved community outreach to Southwest Fresno residents for participation in community planning • Economic development, particularly grocery store/healthy foods 2 Intercept Interviews at Inspiration Park • Residents 13 interviewees Greatest Needs • Parks need to be cleaned up • Anti-racism programming • More parks for kids • Transitional housing programs • Afterschool programs • Services for the homeless • Security at parks • Downtown revitalization projects • Food, meals for the homeless • Street cleanups • Street lighting • Pothole repairs • Pedestrian signaling to improve safety of crosswalks • Information resources for people experiencing domestic violence • More domestic violence shelters • Soccer fields • Improved play equipment at city parks • Bathroom renovations at city parks • Basketball courts • Recreation space for youth with pool tables, table tennis 3 Seniors Focus Group • Senior residents 36 attendees Greatest Needs • Better sidewalks • More parks • Tree trimming program • Funds to repair yard fences, decks Consolidated Plan FRESNO 31 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received • Neighborhood cleanups • Street lighting • Extended hours for existing senior programs • Restore cuts to senior programs to improve the quantity of offerings • Helpline for reporting elder abuse • Homebuyer assistance • Assistance with home repair and improvement • Utility assistance • Handicapped ramps 4 Teen/Pre-Teen Focus Group • Teens, pre-teens, including minorities 30 attendees Greatest Needs • Gym equipment • More field trips and activities • Computer lab • Teen room with TVs • Landscaping improvements grass can be played in • Restroom improvements • Another community center • Pothole repair • Shopping centers/ grocery stores 5 Stakeholder Interviews • Housing and service providers • Community development practitioners 40 interviewees Greatest Community Development Needs • Greater public and private investment in Southwest Fresno; demographic and income statistics from SW Fresno are often used to justify grants but the neighborhood doesn’t see the impact • Careful redevelopment in Southwest Fresno so homeowners are not displaced by rising property values • Improvements along main corridors in Tower District and South Fresno • Parks – maintenance, improvements, addition of new parks • Safety, streetlighting, and environmental improvements in West Fresno • Job training and job counseling services with supportive services; better coordination of existing workforce development resources; Consolidated Plan FRESNO 32 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received focus on living wage jobs with benefits • Youth activities/programming • Senior activities/programming • Senior centers in South and Northwest Fresno • Mental health facilities • Business development, especially grocery stores • Improved transit service for special needs groups (people with disabilities, people who are homeless, recent immigrants, people living with HIV/AIDS especially in rural areas) • The neighborhood revitalization team should be reconstituted • Infill development and improvement of vacant buildings/lots • CDBG should be used in ways that genuinely improve the lives of low-income people, not for streets and infrastructure that the City should be providing anyway • Increase secondary impact of grants/public spending with more robust disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) requirements • City should focus on educating and engaging the public, including youth, in planning processes Greatest Housing and Homelessness Needs • Affordable units with contracts that ensure long-term affordability • Significant affordability covenants should be attached to any project that receives public funding – not just CDBG or HOME, but general funds and all others too • A community land trust model would permanently secure affordable housing within the city’s inventory • Mixed income housing, including housing affordable to low, moderate, and middle income households • Greater mix of housing types – condos, townhomes, apartments • Preservation of existing affordable housing through rental rehab • Single-family rehab and roof repair • Balancing neighborhood investment and gentrification • Code enforcement, particularly in Southwest Fresno Consolidated Plan FRESNO 33 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received • Senior housing • Housing for people with development disabilities • Any housing development should be in the core of the city – the downtown needs to be revived, attractive • Fresno is 35,000 units short of its affordable housing goal; City should step up and take more responsibility for ensuring housing affordability • Case management and supportive services for people who are homeless • Bridge housing, rapid rehousing, and homelessness prevention • Housing and supportive services for youth aging out of foster care • Homelessness needs have spread from downtown to all parts of Fresno – services are needed everywhere • Safety concerns in homeless camps • Seek ways to leverage / maximize the federal funding the City has available • City should identify clear housing priorities and take an active role in reaching out to/recruiting affordable housing developers and partnering with Housing Authority 6 Community Needs Prioritization Meetings • Residents, including minority residents, people with limited English proficiency, people with disabilities, and public/ assisted housing residents • Housing and service providers • Community development practitioners 36 attendees Priority Needs Identified by Participants • Home repair and rehabilitation • Affordable housing construction • Home purchase assistance • Rental assistance • Alternative housing models • Low barrier housing • Housing and programs for people who are homeless or victims of domestic violence • Employment and job training programs • Education programs • Senior programs and services • Sidewalk improvements • Parks, recreational, and senior facility improvements Consolidated Plan FRESNO 34 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received • Street and curb repair • Incentives for community members who clean/maintain alleyways • Accountability and documentation of funds 7 Draft Priority Feedback Meetings • Residents, including minority residents, people with limited English proficiency, people with disabilities, and public/ assisted housing residents • Housing and service providers • Community development practitioners 73 attendees Feedback on Draft Priority A: Provide assistance for the homeless and those at risk of homelessness through low-barrier shelter options and housing first collaborations. • Define “homeless,” “low-barrier shelter,” and “housing first” • Differing views on funding low-barrier shelters, some support less restrictions, others concerned with “abuse of the system” • Support for people without substance abuse, domestic violence, or other specific needs should also be available • Prevent returns to homelessness • Avoid family separation • Center where homeless people can access resources • Pay attention to trauma and criminalization of trauma • Excellent priority; reword to emphasize how big the need is • This is not a priority Feedback on Draft Priority B: Increase development and rehabilitation of affordable housing for low-income and special needs households, particularly in high opportunity areas. • Define “affordable housing” and “high opportunity area” • Focus on long-term solutions to affordable housing need • Support for affordable housing in high opportunity areas, including access to greenspace, grocery stores, low crime, transportation • Include energy efficiency and ADA compliance • Fix up empty houses • Focus on equity and density • Highest priority Feedback on Draft Priority C: Provide public infrastructure and facility improvements to strengthen neighborhood revitalization. • Focus on historically underfunded neighborhoods • Needs to be done equitably • Fix hazardous areas (sidewalks, lighting) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 35 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received • Alleys and potholes • Pools and splash pads • Community centers • Deteriorated property perpetuates crime (broken window theory) Feedback on Draft Priority D: Provide assistance to low-income and special needs households. • Too vague, needs to be more specific; list example activities • Differentiate between Priority B • Provide wraparound services (community services in addition to those needed for addressing homelessness) • Provide ramps, walking paths, greenspace • Could include programs for youth/schools • Prevent returns to homelessness • Very long wait for housing support Feedback on Draft Priority E: Provide fair housing education services to help residents and housing providers understand their rights and responsibilities. • Include legal services • Readily available information on resources • Resource education meetings to non-profits/social services • Train people in neighborhoods to serve on outreach teams • Focus on housing with public funding; stop funding of issues • Frequent checks by FHA • Go beyond fair housing education – equitable housing and anti- displacement Feedback on Draft Priority F: Plan and administer funding for community development, housing, and homelessness activities in compliance with federal regulations. • Ensure collaboration with community groups/allies • Think differently rather than continuing to do the same things • Replace with a community-driven priority • Overarching mandate/mission statement for the program Other Comments Consolidated Plan FRESNO 36 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received • $11 million is not enough to address all of Fresno’s needs • Strengthen collaboration between City and non-profits/private sector, particularly related to homelessness • Plan is focused on housing and homelessness more than public services and community development • Follow-through and implementation is very important • Priorities should be scrapped and money for Southwest Fresno should be given to Southwest Fresno 8 Website Contact Form • Residents, including minority residents, people with limited English proficiency, people with disabilities, and public/ assisted housing residents • Housing and service providers • Community development practitioners 3 comment submissions received General Comments • Use the City’s grant funds for projects that can be completed quickly, that reduce the consequences of possible failure, and that avoid further unfunded liabilities for the City • Find an unused parking lot or other space for construction of a "mini-village" of tiny houses and pop-up shops • Use empty lots to build tiny houses for the homeless • Help organizations already helping such as the Poverello House and Fresno Rescue Mission • Re-purpose empty buildings for low-cost housing • Litter and waste left behind by people who are homeless is a public health concern • Law enforcement should relocate people who are homeless in the interest of preserving the viability of local businesses 9 Community Needs Survey • Residents, including minority residents, people with limited English proficiency, people with disabilities, and public/ assisted housing residents • Housing and service providers • Community development practitioners 500 participants Highest Ranked Community Development Needs • Street, road, or sidewalk improvements • Homeless and domestic violence shelters • Neighborhood cleanups • Drug abuse education/crime prevention • Child abuse prevention • Incentives for creating jobs • Community parks, gyms, and recreational fields • Redevelopment or demolition of abandoned properties • After schools services • Employment training Consolidated Plan FRESNO 37 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Number of Participants Summary of Comments Received • Domestic abuse services • Domestic violence and elder abuse prevention • Outreach to domestic violence and elder abuse victims • Youth centers Highest Ranked Housing and Homeless Needs • Homelessness prevention • Transitional/supportive housing programs • Access to homeless shelters • Outreach to homeless persons • Permanent housing • Construction of new affordable rental units • Energy efficiency improvements to housing • Access to domestic violence and elder abuse shelters Consolidated Plan FRESNO 38 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) NEEDS ASSESSMENT NA-05 Overview Needs Assessment Overview To inform the development of priorities and goals over the next five years, this section of the Consolidated Plan discusses housing, community development, and economic development needs in the City of Fresno. It relies on data from the U.S. Census, the 2011-2015 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS), and a special tabulation of ACS data known as Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data that estimates the number of households with one or more housing needs. Local data regarding homelessness and assisted housing is included. Finally, public input gathered through interviews, focus groups, meetings, and the community survey are coupled with data analysis to identify priority needs related to affordable housing, homelessness, assisted housing, community development, and economic development in Fresno. NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment - 24 CFR 91.205 (a,b,c) Summary of Housing Needs According to the 2011-2015 5-Year American Community Survey, Fresno has a population of 510,450 residents living in 161,915 households. The city’s population increased 3% between 2009 and 2015. Estimates from the 2011-2015 ACS data place the median household income in Fresno at $41,531. This figure represents a 3% decrease from the city’s median household income from 2009, which was $43,036. Fresno’s median income is lower than that of Fresno County, where 5-Year 2011-2015 ACS estimates place the county’s median income at $45,233, down from $46,230 in 2009. Table 6 segments households by income and household type, including small families (2-4 members), large families (5 or more members), households with seniors, and households with young children. There are 78,845 households who are low- or moderate-income, with incomes at or below 80% of the HUD Adjusted Median Family Income (HAMFI). These households constitute nearly half (49%) of all Fresno households. The largest shares of low- and moderate- income households are small families (40%) and families with small children (30%). Large family households make up 18% of these households, while households with older residents are less likely to be low or moderate-income (15% are elderly households and 11% are frail elderly households). Within the designated household types shown in Table 6, households with small children have low or moderate incomes at the highest rate of all family types (64%). For many low- and moderate-income households in Fresno, finding and maintaining suitable housing at an affordable cost is a challenge. Tables 6 through 11 identify housing needs by tenure based on Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data. CHAS data is a special tabulation of the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) that is Consolidated Plan FRESNO 39 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) largely not available through standard Census products. This special dataset provides counts of the number of households that fit certain combinations of HUD-specified housing needs, HUD- defined income limits (primarily 30, 50, and 80% of HAMFI), and household types of particular interest to planners and policy makers. To assess affordability and other types of housing needs, HUD defines four housing problems: 1. Cost burden: A household has a cost burden if its monthly housing costs (including mortgage payments, property taxes, insurance, and utilities for owners and rent and utilities for renters) exceed 30% of monthly income. 2. Overcrowding: A household is overcrowded if there is more than 1 person per room, not including kitchens and bathrooms. 3. Lack of complete kitchen facilities: A household lacks complete kitchen facilities if it lacks one or more of the following: cooking facilities, refrigerator, or a sink with piped water. 4. Lack of complete plumbing facilities: A household lacks complete plumbing facilities if it lacks one or more of the following: hot and cold piped water, a flush toilet, or a bathtub or shower. HUD also defines four severe housing problems, including a severe cost burden (more than 50% of monthly household income is spent on housing costs), severe overcrowding (more than 1.5 people per room, not including kitchens or bathrooms), lack of complete kitchen facilities (as described above), and lack of complete plumbing facilities (as described above). In the City of Fresno, 70,184 households or 43% of all households experience a housing problem. Twenty-eight percent, or 45,350 households, experience a severe housing problem. The most common housing problem in Fresno is severe cost burden, which affects both renters and homeowners in the greatest numbers. Table 7 shows that 31,030 households, or 44% of households with a housing problem, are severely cost burdened. An additional 22,650 households are cost burdened, spending between 30-50% of their income on housing costs. Together, 76% of all Fresno households with a housing problem are spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs. Cost burdens and severe cost burdens have the greatest impact on very low-income renters. Among cost burdened renters, 44% are very low income (earning between 0-30% AMI). Among severely cost burdened renters, 62% are very low income. While affordability is the primary issue facing low- and moderate-income residents, overcrowding and substandard housing also affect these households. Fourteen percent (14%) of households with a housing problem (9,465 households) experience overcrowding. In addition, 5% (or 3,430 households) experience severe overcrowding and 2% (1,429 households) lack complete plumbing or kitchen facilities. Another 3% of households are identified as having zero or negative income. Housing problems not related to affordability affect nearly a quarter (24%) of all households with housing problems in Fresno. Other known housing problems outside of HUD-defined housing problems include blight and limited economic viability of neighborhoods (e.g. the co-location of affordable housing with employment centers and proximity to fresh food sources and other retail and service opportunities). Consolidated Plan FRESNO 40 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The remainder of this section characterizes local housing needs in more detail. The Market Analysis component of the Consolidated Plan identifies resources available to respond to these needs (public housing, tax credit and other subsidized properties, housing and services for the homeless, and others). TABLE 5 - HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT DEMOGRAPHICS Demographics Base Year: 2009 Most Recent Year: 2015 % Change Population 494,665 510,450 3% Households 151,392 161,915 7% Median Income $43,036.00 $41,531.00 -3% Data Source: 2005-2009 ACS (Base Year), 2011-2015 ACS (Most Recent Year) Number of Households Table TABLE 6 - TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS TABLE 0-30% HAMFI >30-50% HAMFI >50-80% HAMFI >80- 100% HAMFI >100% HAMFI Total Households 27,695 23,495 27,655 13,825 69,240 Small Family Households 10,690 9,765 10,880 5,965 33,810 Large Family Households 5,140 4,175 4,955 2,575 8,710 Household contains at least one person 62-74 years of age 3,175 3,855 4,795 2,375 14,725 Household contains at least one- person age 75 or older 1,950 3,140 3,445 1,725 4,985 Households with one or more children 6 years old or younger 9,355 7,060 7,265 3,295 9,845 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 41 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Housing Needs Summary Tables 1. Housing Problems (Households with one of the listed needs) TABLE 7 – HOUSING PROBLEMS TABLE Renter Owner 0-30% AMI >30- 50% AMI >50- 80% AMI >80- 100% AMI Total 0-30% AMI >30-50% AMI >50- 80% AMI >80- 100% AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Substandard Housing - Lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facilities 645 255 290 130 1,320 55 4 10 40 109 Severely Overcrowded - With >1.51 people per room (and complete kitchen and plumbing) 1,285 735 655 220 2,895 75 190 170 100 535 Overcrowded - With 1.01- 1.5 people per room (and none of the above problems) 2,630 1,970 2,230 605 7,435 305 500 760 465 2,030 Housing cost burden greater than 50% of income (and none of the above problems) 13,790 7,665 1,625 280 23,360 2,275 2,560 2,325 510 7,670 Housing cost burden greater than 30% of income (and none of the above problems) 2,020 4,540 7,410 2,000 15,970 525 1,415 3,075 1,665 6,680 Zero/negative Income (and none of the above problems) 1,655 0 0 0 1,655 525 0 0 0 525 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 42 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 2. Housing Problems 2 (Households with one or more Severe Housing Problems: Lacks kitchen or complete plumbing, severe overcrowding, severe cost burden) TABLE 8 – HOUSING PROBLEMS 2 Renter Owner 0-30% AMI >30-50% AMI >50-80% AMI >80- 100% AMI Total 0-30% AMI >30- 50% AMI >50- 80% AMI >80- 100% AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Having 1 or more of four housing problems 18,345 10,625 4,795 1,235 35,000 2,710 3,260 3,265 1,115 10,350 Having none of four housing problems 3,460 6,190 12,000 6,055 27,705 995 3,420 7,600 5,420 17,435 Household has negative income, but none of the other housing problems 1,655 0 0 0 1,655 525 0 0 0 525 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 43 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 3. Cost Burden > 30% TABLE 9 – COST BURDEN > 30% Renter Owner 0-30% AMI >30-50% AMI >50-80% AMI Total 0-30% AMI >30- 50% AMI >50- 80% AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Small Related 8,725 6,980 4,700 20,405 765 1,590 2,185 4,540 Large Related 4,285 2,280 1,375 7,940 485 935 1,190 2,610 Elderly 2,165 2,350 1,620 6,135 1,245 1,585 1,610 4,440 Other 4,715 2,850 2,540 10,105 640 325 950 1,915 Total need by income 19,890 14,460 10,235 44,585 3,135 4,435 5,935 13,505 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 44 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 4. Cost Burden > 50% TABLE 10 – COST BURDEN > 50% Renter Owner 0-30% AMI >30-50% AMI >50-80% AMI Total 0-30% AMI >30-50% AMI >50-80% AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Small Related 7,990 4,100 620 12,710 740 1,105 855 2,700 Large Related 3,890 1,055 95 5,040 365 575 125 1,065 Elderly 1,400 1,490 565 3,455 850 970 710 2,530 Other 4,105 1,905 465 6,475 560 255 690 1,505 Total need by income 17,385 8,550 1,745 27,680 2,515 2,905 2,380 7,800 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 45 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 5. Crowding (More than one person per room) TABLE 11 – CROWDING INFORMATION Renter Owner 0-30% AMI >30-50% AMI >50-80% AMI >80- 100% AMI Total 0-30% AMI >30- 50% AMI >50- 80% AMI >80- 100% AMI Total NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS Single family households 3,465 2,135 2,325 595 8,520 360 460 690 370 1,880 Multiple, unrelated family households 385 440 510 235 1,570 19 235 235 195 684 Other, non-family households 80 145 85 4 314 0 0 0 0 0 Total need by income 3,930 2,720 2,920 834 10,404 379 695 925 565 2,564 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 46 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe the number and type of single person households in need of housing assistance. Estimates of the number of non-elderly single person households in need of housing assistance are included in the “other, non-family” category of Tables 9 and 10. This category includes multi- person households whose members are unrelated (e.g., roommates, un-married partners, etc.). Fresno has 12,020 single-person or multi-person unrelated households that are both low- to moderate-income and spend more than 30% of their incomes on housing costs. Single-person and multi-person unrelated households make up approximately one-fifth (21%) of all cost burdened households. Renters of this household type experience cost burdens over five times the rate of “other, non-family” homeowners (84% versus 16%). Table 9 shows the number of Fresno households that are cost burdened, spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs. The table indicates that nearly half (47%) of all single- person renters who spend more than 30% of their income on housing costs are very low income. Single-person homeowners who are cost burdened are most likely to be moderate income (50%). Severe cost burdens, in which a household spends more than 50% of their income on housing costs, also have severe effects on single-person households. There are 6,475 “other, non-family” renter households that are severely cost burdened. Of these renter households, 63% are very low income. Amongst single-person homeowners, very low-income households make up 37% of severely cost burdened households; moderate income households make up 46%. In Table 11, CHAS data indicates that 314 “other, non-family” renter households experience overcrowding. Among households experiencing overcrowding, 46% are low-income renter households. CHAS data did not identify any overcrowded single-person owner households. Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance who are disabled or victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking. Data gathered from the 2011-2015 ACS estimates that there are 65,587 individuals with disabilities in Fresno, representing 13% of the population. There is no data available that shows housing needs or households with disabled persons, however, patterns found among CHAS data on household income and housing problems can be used to estimate the need for housing assistance among the disabled population. Assuming the pattern of low- to moderate-income households experiencing housing problems applies, poverty status data could indicate if disabled populations have a greater risk of experiencing housing problems. 2011-2015 ACS estimates that 31% of the disabled population falls below the poverty level of $11,770 for a single person in 2015. In comparison, households with incomes below 30% HAMFI comprised only 15% of all households in Fresno but accounted for 35% of all households experiencing one or more housing problems. Therefore, a larger proportion of low-income residents would likely indicate increased susceptibility to housing problems for disabled persons. Additionally, people with disabilities often face greater difficulty finding appropriate housing, given the scarcity of housing that is both affordable and accessible to people with disabilities. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 47 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Open Justice, a criminal justice database published by the California Department of Justice, reports that there were 5,499 domestic-violence related calls for assistance in Fresno in 2018.4 Compared to other cities in California, Fresno has the highest number of domestic-violence related calls, with 10.25 calls per 1,000 residents, exceeding the similarly-sized Sacramento which has 3.43 calls per 1,000 residents.5 Several agencies assist clients who have experienced domestic violence and need housing assistance. The Marjaree Mason Center reports in its 2017-2012 annual report that it provided 156 beds at two safe houses. Naomi’s House, a shelter for single, homeless women, offers 24 beds nightly. The Fresno Housing Authority also allows victims of domestic violence to have priority on its interest list. While other shelter and transitional housing providers exist, such as Rescue Mission and Evangel House, the gap between services and domestic violence calls may indicate the need for significant housing assistance for this population. What are the most common housing problems? CHAS data indicates that the most common housing problems in Fresno, regardless of tenure type, are unaffordable housing costs. Severe housing cost burdens affect 19% of all Fresno residents. Households with low and very-low incomes are particularly vulnerable to severe cost burdens. More than half (58%) of very low-income households and 44% of low-income households are severely cost burdened. Another 14% of all Fresno residents experience cost burdens. Cost burdens have their greatest impact on moderate-income households, affecting 38% of households earning 50-80% AMI. While affordability is the most common housing problem, overcrowding, severe overcrowding and substandard housing affect 12,764 households or 16% of Fresno’s low- to moderate- income households. Are any populations/household types more affected than others by these problems? Renters at nearly every income level are more likely than homeowners to experience at least one housing problem. Cost burdens affect renters at twice the rate of homeowners. Severe cost burdens affect renters at three times the rate of homeowners. This is particularly true for very low-income renters, who experience more cost burdens and severe cost burdens than all low- to middle-income homeowners combined. At low and moderate incomes, homeowners do experience greater instances of severe cost burden. At moderate and middle incomes homeowners experience a greater number of severe cost burdens than renters at the same income level. 4 OpenJustice. Domestic Violence-Related Calls for Assistance. Retrieved from: https://openjustice.doj.ca.gov/exploration/crime-statistics/domestic-violence-related-calls-assistance. 5 Sheehan, Tim. (2019, December 27). Fresno’s domestic violence rate tops California’s big cities. What’s behind the numbers? Retrieved from: https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article238114974.html. Accessed January 23, 2020. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 48 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Overcrowding also affects more renters than homeowners. Renters are 3 times more likely than homeowners to experience overcrowding, and 5 times more likely than homeowners to experience severe overcrowding. Describe the characteristics and needs of Low-income individuals and families with children (especially extremely low-income) who are currently housed but are at imminent risk of either residing in shelters or becoming unsheltered 91.205(c)/91.305(c)). Also discuss the needs of formerly homeless families and individuals who are receiving rapid re-housing assistance and are nearing the termination of that assistance According to 2011-2015 ACS estimates, 25% of Fresno residents live at or below the poverty level. Two-thirds of those residents spend more than 30% of their income for housing, not including childcare, medical or transportation costs. Low wages, rising rental costs, and the scarcity of affordable housing for low- and extremely low-income households place vulnerable households at even greater risk for eviction or homelessness. Individuals and families at imminent risk and those who have experienced homelessness and are receiving rapid re- housing assistance often face a myriad of barriers including prior histories of homelessness or eviction, chronic physical or mental disabilities, poor credit, criminal histories, and limited access to additional education or job skills training. The greatest need of formerly homeless families and individuals receiving rapid re-housing assistance is the availability of standard housing that is affordable to households at or below 50% AMI. For formerly homeless families and individuals nearing the termination of assistance, the top needs are for increased, sustainable income (earned and unearned); access to Social Security disability and other mainstream benefits; linkages to health, mental health, and legal services; access to affordable transportation and childcare; and ongoing case management and supportive services. If a jurisdiction provides estimates of the at-risk population(s), it should also include a description of the operational definition of the at-risk group and the methodology used to generate the estimates: Fresno’s 2015-2023 Housing Element provides a description of persons who are at risk of homelessness. The plan states, “Among the persons at-risk are those leaving institutions (mental hospitals, jail, etc.), victims of domestic violence, people doubled-up in unstable conditions, households with incomes of less than 30 percent of area median income and high housing expenses, farm workers and low-income single-person households. Specify particular housing characteristics that have been linked with instability and an increased risk of homelessness The most fundamental risk factor for homelessness is extreme poverty, leading to unaffordable rents or homeowner costs. Renters with incomes under 30% HAMFI and housing cost burdens over 50% are at risk of homelessness, especially if they experience a destabilizing event such Consolidated Plan FRESNO 49 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) as a job loss, reduction in work hours, or medical emergency/condition. Such factors may also put low income homeowners at risk of foreclosure and subsequent homelessness. NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole. Introduction This section assesses the housing needs of racial and ethnic groups at various income levels in comparison to needs at that income level as a whole to identify any disproportionately greater needs. According to HUD, a disproportionately greater need exists when members of a racial or ethnic group at a given income level experience housing problems at a greater rate (10 percentage points or more) than the income level as a whole. Tables 12 through 15 identify the number of households experiencing one or more of the four housing problems by householder race, ethnicity, and income level. The four housing problems include: (1) cost burdens (paying more than 30% of income for housing costs); (2) overcrowding (more than 1 person per room); (3) lacking complete kitchen facilities; and (4) lacking complete plumbing facilities. Income classifications include: • Very low income – up to 30% of area median income (AMI) or $12,458 for a family of four; • Low income – 30 to 50% AMI or $12,459 to $20,764 for a family of four; • Moderate income – 50 to 80% AMI or $20,765 to $33,224 for a family of four; and • Middle income – 80 to 100% AMI or $33,225 to $41,531 for a family of four. 0%-30% of Area Median Income Out of 27,695 very low-income households in Fresno, 23,605 (or 85%) have at least one housing problem. Pacific Islander households experience housing problems at a disproportionately high rate. All of the 40 very low-income Pacific Islander households have housing problems. Hispanic households make up the largest number of very low-income households with housing problems (11,710 households), though the rate of housing problems is not disproportionate (89%). Of the remaining very low-income households, 83% of Black households, 82% of white and Asian households and 58% of American Indian households have at least one housing problem. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 50 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) TABLE 12 - DISPROPORTIONALLY GREATER NEED 0 - 30% AMI Housing Problems Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 23,605 1,915 2,180 White 5,280 465 725 Black / African American 3,805 350 455 Asian 2,340 200 320 American Indian, Alaska Native 90 30 35 Pacific Islander 40 0 0 Hispanic 11,710 845 635 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30% 30%-50% of Area Median Income Of the 23,495 low income households in Fresno, 19,835 households (84%) have at least one housing problem. All 54 Pacific Islander households at this income level have a housing problem, signifying a disproportionate rate for this group. American Indian households have the second highest rate of housing problems (93%), followed by Black households (88%), Asian households (87%), Hispanic households (86%), and white households (78%). TABLE 13 - DISPROPORTIONALLY GREATER NEED 30 - 50% AMI Housing Problems Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 19,835 3,655 0 White 5,020 1,425 0 Black / African American 2,435 330 0 Asian 1,840 275 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 189 15 0 Pacific Islander 54 0 0 Hispanic 9,860 1,570 0 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30% Consolidated Plan FRESNO 51 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 50%-80% of Area Median Income Two-thirds (67%) of the 27,655 moderate income households in Fresno experience at least one housing problem. American Indian households at this income level experience a disproportionate rate of housing problems, with 83% (145 households) having a housing problem. Other racial and ethnic groups experience housing problems at a rate close to the city’s average. Housing problems affect 71% of moderate-income Asian households, as well as 68% of Black households, 67% of Pacific Islander and Hispanic households and 64% of white households. - TABLE 14 - DISPROPORTIONALLY GREATER NEED 50 - 80% AMI Housing Problems Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 18,545 9,110 0 White 5,590 3,110 0 Black / African American 1,315 605 0 Asian 1,740 700 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 145 30 0 Pacific Islander 20 10 0 Hispanic 9,325 4,505 0 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30% 80%-100% of Area Median Income Approximately 43% of all middle-income Fresno households have a housing problem (6,015 households). Asian households at this income level are disproportionately affected, with 56% having a housing problem. Black, Hispanic and white households have housing problems at or near the city’s average (44%, 43% and 42% respectively). American Indian and Pacific Islander households either did not indicate any middle income households with housing problems or indicated no households at this income level. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 52 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) TABLE 15 - DISPROPORTIONALLY GREATER NEED 80 - 100% AMI Housing Problems Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 6,015 7,815 0 White 1,965 2,745 0 Black / African American 380 475 0 Asian 745 575 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 0 20 0 Pacific Islander 0 0 0 Hispanic 2,800 3,715 0 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4.Cost Burden greater than 30% Discussion At low and very low incomes, Pacific Islander households experience disproportionately high rates of housing problems compared with the city’s average. At moderate incomes, housing problems disproportionately affect American Indian households. Finally, at middle incomes, Asian households experience a disproportionate rate of housing problems. While disproportionate rates of housing problems tell us about the comparative housing needs across all racial and ethnic groups, they do not fully indicate the level of need within each group. Pacific Islander households, as defined by US Census data, only make up 40 of the city’s very low-income households, 54 low-income households, and 30 moderate income households. Hispanic households, on the other hand, constitute the majority of households with housing needs. Over 40% of all very low-income Fresno households (11,710 households) are Hispanic households with housing problems. White households experience housing problems at lower rates than the city’s average at all income levels; however, the number of white households with a housing problem comes second to that of Hispanics at every income level as well. NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole. Introduction This section assesses the severe housing needs of racial and ethnic groups at various income levels in comparison to severe needs at that income level as a whole to identify any Consolidated Plan FRESNO 53 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) disproportionately greater needs. Like the preceding analysis, this section uses HUD’s definition of disproportionately greater need, which occurs when one racial or ethnic group at a given income level experiences housing problems at a rate that is at least 10 percentage points greater than the income level as a whole. Tables 16 through 19 identify the number of households with one or more of the severe housing needs by householder race and ethnicity. The four severe housing problems include: (1) severe cost burden (paying more than 50% of income for housing and utilities); (2) severe crowding (more than 1.5 people per room); (3) lack of complete kitchen facilities; and (4) lack of complete plumbing facilities. Income classifications include: • Very low income – up to 30% of area median income (AMI) or $12,458 for a family of four; • Low income – 30 to 50% AMI or $12,459 to $20,764 for a family of four; • Moderate income – 50 to 80% AMI or $20,765 to $33,224 for a family of four; and • Middle income – 80 to 100% AMI or $33,225 to $41,531 for a family of four. 0%-30% of Area Median Income Out of 27,690 very low-income households in the city of Fresno, 76% have one or more severe housing problem. Pacific Islander households are disproportionately affected at this income level, with 100% of the 40 Pacific Islander households experiencing a severe housing problem. Hispanic households have the second highest rate of housing problems (81%), followed by Asian households (75%), white households (71%), Black households (69%), and American Indian households (42%). TABLE 16 – SEVERE HOUSING PROBLEMS 0 - 30% AMI Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 21,055 4,455 2,180 White 4,590 1,155 725 Black / African American 3,205 945 455 Asian 2,135 405 320 American Indian, Alaska Native 64 55 35 Pacific Islander 40 0 0 Hispanic 10,710 1,840 635 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50% Consolidated Plan FRESNO 54 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 30%-50% of Area Median Income There are 13,885 low income households that have a severe housing problem, comprising 59% of the households at this income level. Pacific Islander households are disproportionately affected, with severe housing problems affecting 100% of the 54 Pacific Islander households. American Indian experience severe housing problems at a rate of 66%, followed by Black households (62%), Hispanic households (59%), white households (58%) and Asian households (56%). TABLE 17 – SEVERE HOUSING PROBLEMS 30 - 50% AMI Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 13,885 9,610 0 White 3,735 2,705 0 Black / African American 1,730 1,040 0 Asian 1,190 925 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 135 69 0 Pacific Islander 54 0 0 Hispanic 6,700 4,735 0 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50% 50%-80% of Area Median Income Out of 27,660 moderate income households in the city, 29% have a severe housing problem. At this income level, Pacific Islander households continue to have disproportionate rates of housing problems, with 67% having a severe housing problem. Asian households have the second highest rate of severe housing problems, 36%. All other racial and ethnic groups are at or below the city’s average; 29% of Hispanic, Black and white households have severe housing problems, as well as 6% of American Indian households. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 55 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) TABLE 18 – SEVERE HOUSING PROBLEMS 50 - 80% AMI Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 8,060 19,600 0 White 2,385 6,320 0 Black / African American 560 1,355 0 Asian 870 1,580 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 10 160 0 Pacific Islander 20 10 0 Hispanic 4,065 9,770 0 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS *The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50% 80%-100% of Area Median Income Seventeen percent (17%) of the city’s 13,825 middle income households have a severe housing problem. Asian households at this income level are disproportionately affected, with 32% having a severe housing problem. Nineteen percent of Hispanic households, 13% of white households and 11% of Black households also experience at least one severe housing problem at this income level. TABLE 19 – SEVERE HOUSING PROBLEMS 80 - 100% AMI Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more of four housing problems Has none of the four housing problems Household has no/negative income, but none of the other housing problems Jurisdiction as a whole 2,350 11,475 0 White 535 4,175 0 Black / African American 110 745 0 Asian 425 895 0 American Indian, Alaska Native 0 20 0 Pacific Islander 0 0 0 Hispanic 1,240 5,280 0 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS 0*The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4.Cost Burden over 50% Consolidated Plan FRESNO 56 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Discussion Hispanic households make up the majority of households at all income groups, as well as the majority of households with one or more severe housing problems. Fifty-one percent of all Hispanic households earning less than 100% AMI (22,715 households) have severe housing problems. Comparatively, white households, which make up the second largest number of households earning below 100% AMI, have severe housing problems at a rate of 43%. Only American Indian households experience severe housing problems at a lesser rate of 39%. All other groups experience severe housing problems at a rate higher than Hispanic households: Asian households (53%), Black households (55%), and Pacific Islander households (92%). At very low, low, and moderate incomes, Pacific Islander households continue to experience a disproportionately higher rate of severe housing problems than the city’s average. Asian households also have a disproportionate rate of severe housing problems at middle incomes. NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens – 91.205 (b)(2) Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole Introduction This section assesses the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole. While the preceding sections assessed all housing and severe housing problems, Table 20 focuses only on the share of income households spend on housing. Data is broken down into groups spending less than 30% of income on housing costs, those paying between 30 and 50% (i.e., with a cost burden), and those paying over 50% (i.e., with a severe cost burden). The final column, “no/negative income,” identifies households without an income, for whom housing as a share of income was not calculated. Housing Cost Burden TABLE 20 – GREATER NEED: HOUSING COST BURDENS AMI Housing Cost Burden <=30% 30-50% >50% No / negative income Jurisdiction as a whole 87,650 34,475 37,355 2,440 White 39,090 11,035 11,175 765 Black / African American 5,370 3,265 5,065 480 Asian 8,675 3,455 3,235 375 American Indian, Alaska Native 335 280 185 35 Pacific Islander 60 20 94 0 Hispanic 32,190 15,570 16,880 770 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 57 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Discussion Pacific Islanders, Black and American Indian households experience disproportionately greater rates of housing cost burden in Fresno than other racial or ethnic groups. While 44% of the city is housing cost burdened, 65% of Pacific Islander households, 59% of Black households and 56% of American Indian households are housing cost burdened. Hispanic households experience housing cost burdens at a rate of 50%, followed by Asian households (42%) and white households (36%). American Indian households have the highest rate of cost burden, with 34% spending between 30-50% of their incomes on housing costs. In total numbers, however, Hispanic and white households exhibit a higher number of households experiencing housing cost burden. There are 15,570 Hispanic households and 11,035 white households experiencing housing cost burdens. A similar pattern occurs with severe housing cost burdens. Pacific Islander households have the highest rate of severe cost burden, with 54% of the 174 Pacific Islander households spending over 50% of their incomes on housing costs. It should also be noted that there are 16,880 Hispanic households and 11,175 white households that also experience severe housing cost burden. NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion – 91.205(b)(2) Are there any Income categories in which a racial or ethnic group has disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category as a whole? Pacific Islander households experience disproportionately greater housing need at very low, low, and moderate-income levels. Pacific Islander households also experience the highest rate of housing cost burden amongst all households spending over 50% of their incomes on housing costs. Asian households experience disproportionately greater housing need at middle incomes. American Indian households have the highest rate of housing cost burden for households spending between 30-50% of their incomes on housing costs. Are any of those racial or ethnic groups located in specific areas or neighborhoods in your community? Figures 1 through 5 indicate that Fresnans of all racial and ethnic backgrounds live throughout the city of Fresno. However, some areas show greater clustering of racial and ethnic groups than others. Hispanic residents make up the largest share of Fresno residents at the decennial census (46.7%). However, fewer Hispanic residents are shown residing in northeast and northwest Fresno. Hispanic residents have their greatest presence in areas south of E. Clinton Ave and east of Highway 41, particularly in southeast Fresno. White residents, who make up the second largest share of Fresnans, primarily live north of Sequoia-Kings Canyon Freeway with clustering particularly in northeast and northwest Fresno. Asian and Pacific Islander residents show clustering patterns in various areas throughout the Consolidated Plan FRESNO 58 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) city, particularly in northeast Fresno between N. Cedar Avenue and the eastern city limit, along Sequoia-Kings Canyon Freeway east of Hwy 41, and along N. Cedar Avenue between E. Butler and E. California Avenues. Black residents in Fresno show clustering particularly in southwest Fresno, immediately west of Fresno State University, in southeast Fresno along S. Chestnut Avenue, and in west Fresno south of the railroad tracks along N. Santa Fe Avenue. Native American residents in Fresno tend to live north of the Sequoia Kings Canyon Freeway, but do not otherwise show patterns of clustering. FIGURE 1 – POPULATION BY BLOCK GROUP FOR HISPANIC RESIDENTS IN FRESNO, 2010 Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 59 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 2 – POPULATION BY BLOCK GROUP FOR WHITE, NON-HISPANIC RESIDENTS IN FRESNO, 2010 Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 60 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 3 – POPULATION BY BLOCK GROUP FOR ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER RESIDENTS IN FRESNO, 2010 Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 61 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 4 – POPULATION BY BLOCK GROUP FOR BLACK, NON-HISPANIC RESIDENTS IN FRESNO, 2010 Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 62 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 5 – POPULATION BY BLOCK GROUP FOR NATIVE AMERICAN RESIDENTS IN FRESNO, 2010 Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 63 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) NA-35 Public Housing – 91.205(b) Introduction Fresno residents are served by the Housing Authority of the City of Fresno (FH). Between public housing, Housing Choice Vouchers, project-based vouchers, and units under the Section 202 and Section 811 programs, a total of over 13,596 subsidized units are available in the city, housing 35,363 individual residents. Voucher programs are the primary source of these subsidized housing units representing 12,847 (94%) of these subsidized units (10,648 Housing Choice Vouchers and 2,199 Project-Based Vouchers). There are 651 units of conventional public housing and another 98 units designated for elderly and/or disabled households through the Section 202 and 811 programs. The FH provides a range of housing in the City of Fresno, including affordable housing, senior housing, permanent supportive housing, and market rate housing. PUBLIC HOUSING SUMMARY Units Available Residents Served Public Housing 651 1,827 Housing Choice Vouchers 10,648 29,207 Project Based Section 8 2,199 4,221 Section 202 79 88 Section 811 19 20 Total 13,596 35,363 Data Source: 2017 Picture of Subsidized Households, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/assthsg.html Consolidated Plan FRESNO 64 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Totals in Use TABLE 21 - PUBLIC HOUSING BY PROGRAM TYPE Program Type Certificate Mod- Rehab Public Housing Vouchers Total Project - based Tenant - based Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Family Unification Program Disabled* # of units vouchers in use 0 0 760 6,792 83 6,441 39 133 89 *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 65 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Characteristics of Residents TABLE 22 – CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENTS BY PROGRAM TYPE Program Type Certificate Mod- Rehab Public Housing Vouchers Total Project - based Tenant - based Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Family Unification Program Average Annual Income 0 0 11,498 11,936 9,842 11,933 9,401 12,627 Average length of stay 0 0 5 6 0 7 1 7 Average Household size 0 0 2 3 3 3 1 4 # Homeless at admission 0 0 1 10 1 7 2 0 # of Elderly Program Participants (>62) 0 0 106 754 3 726 2 3 # of Disabled Families 0 0 122 1,452 20 1,326 18 18 # of Families requesting accessibility features 0 0 760 6,792 83 6,441 39 133 # of HIV/AIDS program participants 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 # of DV victims 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 66 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Race of Residents TABLE 23 – RACE OF PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENTS BY PROGRAM TYPE Program Type Race Certificat e Mod- Rehab Public Housing Vouchers Total Project - based Tenant - based Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Family Unification Program Disabled* White 0 0 496 4,001 49 3,753 33 111 51 Black/African American 0 0 161 2,208 22 2,143 6 18 18 Asian 0 0 87 466 8 438 0 1 17 American Indian/Alaska Native 0 0 12 102 3 93 0 3 3 Pacific Islander 0 0 4 15 1 14 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 67 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Ethnicity of Residents TABLE 24 – ETHNICITY OF PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENTS BY PROGRAM TYPE Program Type Ethnicity Certificate Mod- Rehab Public Housing Vouchers Total Project - based Tenant - based Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Family Unification Program Disabled* Hispanic 0 0 451 3,157 41 2,990 11 89 22 Not Hispanic 0 0 309 3,635 42 3,451 28 44 67 *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 68 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Section 504 Needs Assessment: Describe the needs of public housing tenants and applicants on the waiting list for accessible units: The data from HUD PIH Information Center shows Fresno as having 760 public housing units in use within the city, 122 (16%) of which are held by a family containing one or more people with a disability. Of the city’s 6,792 voucher units, 1,452 (21%) are occupied by a disable household. According to the HUD data, all 760 of the public housing residents and 6,792 voucher households captured in this reporting had requested units with accessibility features. As many people with disabilities live on limited incomes, often just a modest $771/month SSI payment, there are few options for them other than public housing. Availability of additional units with accessibility features is the greatest need of this population. Most immediate needs of residents of Public Housing and Housing Choice voucher holders Current residents in public and other assisted housing units are most immediately in need of opportunities and supports to grow and attain a level of self-sufficiency. These supports include programs in areas such as job training and assistance, childcare, transportation, health-related assistance, after school programs, adult education, and child educational enrichment. How do these needs compare to the housing needs of the population at large The needs of public housing residents and voucher holders are different from those of the city’s overall low- and moderate-income population primarily in that these residents are housed in stable and decent housing. With this need met, residents are able to work on other needs that families typically face in addition to housing insecurity. These other needs frequently include childcare, healthcare, employment, transportation, and food. NA-40 Homeless Needs Assessment – 91.205(c) Introduction This section provides an assessment of the City of Fresno’s homeless population and its needs. The Fresno Madera CoC conducts an annual homeless “Point-in-time Count” during the last ten days of January each year. The 2019 point-in-time count for Fresno and Madera counties was held on January 29, 2019. It counted 2,508 persons experiencing homelessness in total, including chronically homeless (698 persons, or 28 percent), unaccompanied and parenting youth households (134 persons, or 5 percent), persons in families with children (241, or 10 percent), and veterans (235, or 10 percent). If data is not available for the categories "number of persons becoming and exiting homelessness each year," and "number of days that persons experience homelessness," describe these categories for each homeless population type (including chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth): Consolidated Plan FRESNO 69 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Of the 2,508 homeless persons counted in the point-in-time count, 698 people were counted as chronically homeless (28 percent). Of the 698 chronically homeless persons, 23 were sheltered in emergency shelter (3 percent), none were in transitional housing, and 675 were unsheltered (97 percent). The 2019 point-in-time count counted 241 homeless persons in families with children (10 percent of total persons experiencing homelessness), 235 veterans (10 percent of total), and 134 persons in unaccompanied and parenting youth households (5 percent of total). The 241 persons in families with children included 81 households with 154 children under the age of 18. 225 of the 241 persons in these households were sheltered, with 186 persons (77 percent of total persons in family households with children) in emergency shelters and 39 (16 percent of total) in transitional housing. 16 persons in households of families with children were unsheltered (7 percent of total persons in family households with children). Of the 235 homeless veterans, 40 were in emergency shelters (17 percent), 29 were in transitional housing (12 percent), and 166 were unsheltered (71 percent). Unaccompanied youth households included 112 unaccompanied youth, 7 parenting youth, and 15 children of parenting youth. Of the 112 unaccompanied youth, 21 were in emergency shelters (19 percent), 7 were in transitional housing (6 percent), and 84 were unsheltered (75 percent). Of the 22 parenting youth and children in parenting youth households, 16 were in emergency shelters (73 percent), and 6 were in transitional housing (27 percent). Note that these figures do not represent the entire homeless population in the counties, but rather the number of homeless that were sheltered and unsheltered during a point-in-time count. As the inventory of homeless facilities in the area shows, a considerably higher number of homeless persons are assisted within Fresno and Madera counties than the point-in-time count of chronically homeless reflects. Nature and Extent of Homelessness: (Optional) Nature and Extent of Homelessness Race Sheltered Unsheltered White 323 1,359 African American 78 352 Asian 8 30 American Indian/ Alaskan Native 12 239 Native Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander 7 36 Multiple Races 11 53 Ethnicity Sheltered Unsheltered Non-Hispanic/ Non-Latino 210 1,132 Hispanic/ Latino 229 937 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 70 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance for families with children and the families of veterans. The 2019 point-in-time count identified 81 households experiencing homelessness with at least one adult and one child, which included a total of 241 people, 154 of whom were under the age of 18 (66 percent). Of the 241 persons in households with at least one adult and one child, 225 (93 percent) were sheltered in emergency or transitional housing, and 16 (7 percent) were unsheltered. Of the 235 veterans counted during the point-in-time count, 69 (29 percent) were sheltered and 166 (71 percent) were unsheltered. Describe the Nature and Extent of Homelessness by Racial and Ethnic Group. The point-in-time count categorized the number of sheltered and unsheltered individuals who were homeless in Fresno and Madera counties by race and ethnicity. The count found that 67 percent of all sheltered and unsheltered individuals were white, 17 percent were Black, and 10 percent were American Indian or Alaskan Native. People who identified as Asian, Native Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander, and multiple races each comprised 3 percent or less of sheltered and unsheltered individuals in Fresno and Madera counties. Regarding ethnicity, the count found that 46 percent of the total sheltered and unsheltered homeless population in Fresno and Madera counties were Hispanic/ Latino, and 54 percent were non-Hispanic/ Latino. Describe the Nature and Extent of Unsheltered and Sheltered Homelessness. The 2019 point-in-time count counted a total of 2,508 homeless persons, including 439 sheltered (18 percent) and 2,069 unsheltered persons (82 percent). Of the 439 sheltered individuals, 353 (80 percent) were in emergency shelters, and 86 (20 percent) were in transitional housing. Discussion Data from both the point-in-time count and stakeholder input indicate a high level of need for homelessness services in the City of Fresno. Survey respondents also rated all homeless services at high levels of need. In particular, 80 percent of survey respondents rated homeless prevention as a high need, and 73 percent rated transitional/ supportive housing and permanent housing as high needs. Access to homeless shelters and permanent housing were rated as high needs by 72 percent of survey respondents. NA-45 Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment - 91.205 (b,d) Introduction This section discusses the characteristics and needs of persons in various subpopulations of the City of Fresno who are not necessarily homeless but may require supportive services, including persons with HIV/AIDS, the elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical, or developmental), persons with alcohol or drug addiction, victims of domestic violence, and persons with a criminal record and their families. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 71 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 72 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) HOPWA TABLE 25 – HOPWA DATA Current HOPWA formula use: Cumulative cases of AIDS reported Data no longer available Area incidence of AIDS Data no longer available Rate per population Data no longer available Number of new cases prior year (3 years of data) Data no longer available Rate per population (3 years of data) Data no longer available Current HIV surveillance data: Number of Persons living with HIC (PLWH) 1,801 Area Prevalence (PLWH per population) 232.6 per 100,000 population Number of new HIV cases reported in 2017 158 Data Source: CDC HIV Surveillance HIV Housing Need (HOPWA Grantees Only) TABLE 26 – HIV HOUSING NEED Type of HOPWA Assistance Estimates of Unmet Need Tenant based rental assistance 4 Short-term Rent, Mortgage, and Utility 10 Facility Based Housing (Permanent, short-term or transitional) 20 Data Source: HOPWA CAPER and HOPWA Beneficiary Verification Worksheet Describe the characteristics of special needs populations in your community: Elderly and Frail Elderly According to the 2013-2017 ACS 5-year estimates, 10.3 percent of the City of Fresno’s population is elderly, aged 65 and over. 4.3 percent of the population is considered frail elderly, aged 75 and over. Slightly less than half (45.1 percent) of elderly individuals aged 65 and over in the city have a disability. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 73 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Persons with Disabilities Within the city, 13.9 percent of all residents have one or more disabilities, including: • Hearing difficulty – 3.8 percent • Vision difficulty – 3.5 percent • Cognitive difficulty – 6.5 percent • Ambulatory difficulty – 7.9 percent • Self-care difficulty- 3.5 percent • Independent living difficulty – 7.7 percent FIGURE 6- DISABILITY BY TYPE Persons with HIV/AIDS and their families As of 2017, there were approximately 1,801 persons living with HIV in the Fresno MSA region, a rate of 232.6 people living with HIV per 100,000 population. Of the total persons living with HIV in the region as of 2017, 1,482 were adult and adolescent men and 319 were adult and adolescent women. There were 158 new diagnoses in 2017, a rate of 20.2 new diagnoses per 100,000 population. 143 of the 158 new diagnoses were of adult and adolescent men, and 15 were of adult and adolescent women. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 74 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Immigrants and Refugees An estimated 104,829 residents of the City of Fresno are foreign-born, according to American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates for 2013-2017. Of these residents, an estimated 11,614 (11.1 percent) began residing in the United States in 2010 or later. Of the foreign-born population, approximately 43.3 percent are naturalized citizens, and 56.7 percent are not citizens.6 Of the foreign-born population who entered the United States in 2010 or later, an estimated 64.1 percent were born in Asia, 29.5 percent were born in Latin America, and 4.1 percent were born in Europe. Persons with Alcohol or Drug Addiction The region that includes the City of Fresno and its surrounding counties has an estimated 6.77 percent rate of alcohol use disorder in the past year by individuals aged 12 and older, according to 2014-2016 data from the US Substance Abuse & Mental Health Data Archive (SAMHDA). Cocaine use in the region was estimated at 2.06 percent of the population, and heroin use was estimated at 0.21%.7 There were an estimated 408 drug overdose deaths in Fresno County from 2015 to 2017, a rate of 14 persons per 100,000 population.8 Victims of Domestic Violence The Centers for Disease Control estimates that 34.9 percent of women and 31.1 percent of men in California have experienced any contact sexual violence, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner in their lifetimes.9 This equates to an estimated 92,352 women and 79,124 men living in Fresno, based on the city’s 2017 total population of 519,037.10 5.1 percent of women and 6.4 percent of men have experienced any contact sexual violence, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner in the past 12 months, equating to an estimated 13,496 women and 16,283 men in Fresno. Re-entry Populations In the state of California, an estimated 236,000 residents are on probation, and 90,000 are on parole.11 As of 2018, there were more than 10,000 adults under probation in Fresno County’s 6 2013-2017 American Community Survey Estimates for Selected Characteristics of the Foreign-Born Population by Period of Entry into the United States, Table S0502 7 Substance Abuse & Mental Health Data Archive. “Interactive National Survey on Drug Use and Health Substate Estimates.” https://pdas.samhsa.gov/saes/substate 8 County Health Rankings & Roadmaps. “Drug Overdose Deaths.” https://www.countyhealthrankings.org/ 9 National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) | 2010-2012 State Report. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/NISVS-StateReportBook.pdf 10 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates for Total Population in the City of Fresno, Table DP05 11 Prison Policy Initiative. (n.d.) California Profile. Retrieved from: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/profiles/CA.html Consolidated Plan FRESNO 75 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Adult Services Division.12 The large numbers of county residents under criminal justice supervision indicates a continuing need to address the housing and supportive service needs of this population in Fresno. What are the housing and supportive service needs of these populations and how are these needs determined? The primary housing and supportive needs of these subpopulations (the elderly, frail elderly, persons with disabilities, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, persons with alcohol or drug addiction, victims of domestic violence, and reentry populations) were determined by input from both service providers and the public through the Housing and Community Needs Survey, public meetings, and stakeholder interviews. Housing that is Affordable, Accessible, Safe, and Low-Barrier For all vulnerable populations, the high cost of housing is an issue. A high percentage of residents within these population subgroups live at or below the federal poverty level. Low incomes force many people with special needs to live in congregate care, have roommates, or live with family. HUD’s fair market rent documentation for FY 2020 estimates fair market rent for a two-bedroom unit in the Fresno metro as $980 per month.13 High housing costs make it difficult for vulnerable populations, who often live on very low incomes, to afford housing. Because of the high cost of housing, there is a need to increase the availability of affordable housing for vulnerable populations. This could include options such as smaller housing units; accessory dwelling units; cohousing with shared services; and other housing types that support increased levels of affordability. For the elderly and frail elderly, people with disabilities, and others that may not have access to vehicles, there is a need for housing that is accessible to transportation, recreation, and employment. Group homes and other housing options for people with disabilities are often located outside of urban communities and provide low levels of access to transit and walkability. These groups need housing options that are integrated into the community and reduce social isolation. Persons living with HIV/AIDS need low-barrier housing free from requirements surrounding drug testing, sobriety, criminal background, and medical appointments. Stakeholders working with persons living with HIV/AIDS and/or the HOPWA program emphasized that a ‘housing first’ model, in which permanent housing is provided without other barriers, is needed. Similar to other vulnerable populations, persons living with HIV/AIDS need housing that provides easy access to health services, resources, and employment. 12 Fresno County Probation Department. (2018). 2017-2018 Annual Report. Retrieved from: https://www.co.fresno.ca.us/home/showdocument?id=37231 13 HUD User (n.d.). Fresno HUD Metro FMR Area Small Area FY 2020 Fair Market Rents. Retrieved from: https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/fmr/fmrs/FY2020_code/2020summary.odn Consolidated Plan FRESNO 76 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Housing may be inaccessible to vulnerable populations for a variety of reasons. Persons with disabilities may find that their housing options are not ADA compliant or are outside the service range for public transportation. People living with HIV/AIDS, immigrants and refugees, people with criminal histories, and other vulnerable populations are often discriminated against in housing application processes. Housing that is safe and clean is another need for vulnerable population groups. Units that are not clean or have other unhealthy conditions can worsen health issues for groups that are already vulnerable, such as persons living with HIV/AIDS. Transportation Access to transportation is an important concern for vulnerable population groups. Persons with disabilities and others without access to vehicles need housing in close proximity to transportation services in order to access employment, health services, and recreation opportunities. If transit is not within walking distance, vulnerable populations need accessible, reliable transportation services to provide access to everyday needs. Specifically, persons with intellectual or developmental disabilities may need companion assistance in transportation services in order to reach their destinations. Persons with HIV/AIDS need housing nearby transportation services in order to access health services and other resources. Accessible, reliable transportation also makes it easier for service providers to reach people for in-home services. Specialized Housing and Supportive Services Specialized housing is often needed to target needs of specific vulnerable populations. For example, people with intellectual or developmental disabilities and people with alcohol or drug addiction have specific housing needs that may be addressed through housing with wraparound services. Specifically, people with intellectual or developmental disabilities often need programming such as case management or life skills programming that does not violate direct service requirements. Persons living with HIV/AIDS may also need case management services and other supportive services, although stakeholders interviewed as part of this planning process emphasized that supportive services should not be required for people living with HIV/AIDS to access housing. Workforce Development and Employment Services Vulnerable populations may also need workforce development and employment services. These programs may include employment navigation, job training, education, transportation services, and case management focused on employment, among others. Physical and Mental Health and Treatment Services Access to healthcare is a need for vulnerable populations. Stakeholders and focus group participants noted a need for increased access to mental and physical health services for low- Consolidated Plan FRESNO 77 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) income residents. Stakeholders also emphasized a need for a wider range of drug and alcohol outpatient services. Education/Combating Perceptions Combatting stigmas is an important concern for many vulnerable populations. In particular, for adults with criminal histories and people living with HIV/AIDS, it may be especially difficult to find adequate housing. Stakeholders noted that landlords often perceive persons with criminal histories or people living with HIV/AIDS as high-risk applicants. Because of this, they noted that others frequently get priority over these groups in accessing housing. Further, a lack of understanding regarding the transmission of HIV may cause people to lose housing or employment, and many people become homeless for this reason. Outreach Outreach to vulnerable populations to ensure they are aware of available services is another need. This includes development of relationships and trust so that people feel comfortable seeking out needed services. There is also a need to provide clarity in marketing and in public buildings about what services are available. Discuss the size and characteristics of the population with HIV/AIDS and their families within the Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area: The Fresno region ranked 17th among Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) in the rate of diagnoses of HIV infection as of 2017.14 There were 158 new diagnoses in the MSA in 2017, a rate of 20.2 new diagnoses per 100,000 population. 143 of the 158 new diagnoses were of adult and adolescent men, and 15 were of adult and adolescent women. 127 of the 143 newly diagnosed men contracted HIV from male-to-male sexual contact. 13 of the 15 newly diagnosed women contracted HIV from heterosexual contact. At the end of 2016, there were a total of 1,801 persons living with HIV in the region, a rate of 232.6 cases per 100,000 population. Of the total persons living with HIV in the region as of 2017, 1,482 were adult and adolescent men and 319 were adult and adolescent women. Teens and men aged 13 to 24 had the highest number of new cases (46), followed men aged 25 to 34 (43 cases). Men aged 25 to 34 were diagnosed with HIV at the highest rate (55.2 diagnoses per 100,000 population in 2017), followed by teens and men aged 13 to 24 (51.8 new diagnoses per 100,000 population). Although younger men tended to be diagnosed more 14 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017). Diagnoses of HIV Infection among Adults and Adolescents in Metropolitan Statistical Areas--United States and Puerto Rico, 2017. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/library/reports/surveillance/cdc-hiv-surveillance-supplemental-report-vol-24- 2.pdf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 78 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) frequently, almost half of adult men living with the disease are over age 45 (820, or 46 percent), and almost one in four are aged 55 and over (417, or 23 percent). New diagnoses for women occurred in small numbers across all age groups, with the highest rate of diagnoses occurring amongst women aged 35 to 44 (8.2 new diagnoses per 100,000 population). About 3 in 5 women living with HIV are over 45 (61 percent), and almost one third (31 percent) are aged 55 and over. By race and ethnicity, the largest number of new diagnoses occurred amongst Hispanic adult and adolescent males. In 2017, there were 89 new diagnoses for Hispanic/ Latino males, 27 for white males, 15 for Black/ African American males, 7 for Asian males and 1 for American Indian/Alaskan native males. Black males experienced the highest rate of infection at 80.9 cases per 100,000 persons, compared to 44.9 for Hispanic males and 21.9 for white males. There were 789 Hispanic/ Latino male adults or adolescents living with the disease in the Fresno region, the highest number of any population group. Hispanic/ Latino women had the highest number of new diagnoses amongst women, with 8 of the 15 new cases among women in 2017. Black women experienced the highest rate of new diagnoses among women at 11 diagnoses per 100,000 compared to 4.1 for Hispanic/ Latino women and 1.5 for white women. Hispanic women had the highest numbers for women living with HIV in the region, making up 142 of the 319 women in the region living with HIV (45 percent). Data is not available regarding prevalence and diagnoses of AIDS at the metro, county, or city level. NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs – 91.215 (f) Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Facilities Buildings and infrastructure open to the general public, whether owned by the government or by nonprofits, may be considered public facilities under the CDBG program. Survey respondents in the City of Fresno ranked public facility needs in the community as follows, with one as the highest priority: 1. Homeless and domestic violence shelters 2. Community parks, gyms, and recreational fields 3. Youth centers 4. Health care facilities 5. Community centers In particular, homeless and domestic violence shelters were rated as a high need by 71 percent of survey respondents and as a moderate need by 22 percent of respondents. Community parks, gyms, and recreational fields were rated as a high need by 62 percent of respondents and as a moderate need by 23 percent of respondents. 57 percent of respondents rated youth centers as a high need, and 31 percent rated them as a moderate need. In addition to the needs rated in the survey, participants noted a need for: Consolidated Plan FRESNO 79 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Maintenance of facilities located in south Fresno • Community centers, libraries, parks and landscaping in central, south, and west Fresno • Increasing the availability and quality of parks and libraries in south Fresno • Substance abuse, domestic violence, and homeless shelters available evenly throughout the community • Low- or no-barrier overnight and daytime shelters • Low-barrier transitional housing • Shelters and housing that provide supportive services • Shelters focused on LGBTQ and transgender populations • Domestic violence shelters that accept pets • Areas for people who are homeless to park cars or camp • Space in vacant buildings for nonprofits to provide public services • Redevelopment of vacant properties • Adaptive reuse of vacant buildings as affordable housing • Mobile home rehab • Efforts to support energy efficiency in housing • Shaded play structures and water features in parks • Investment in areas that have experienced disinvestment • A centrally located senior center Public facility goals identified in the City of Fresno General Plan (2015-2023) and other local plans include: • Expand the availability of permanent supportive housing, so our homeless residents can move from constant crisis, into safe, stable and supported housing until they are self- sufficient. • Focus funding efforts on increasing the number of Neighborhood and Community Parks, especially within the areas south of Shaw Avenue • Seek dedicated funding sources for parkland acquisition, improvement, and ongoing maintenance costs, in both growth areas and established neighborhoods • Identify underutilized and vacant land within the city that can be acquired and developed as parks to meet the needs of existing residents and cure deficiencies in established neighborhoods How were these needs determined? The public facility needs listed above were generated based on input from multiple stakeholders consulted through interviews, public meetings, and a community survey completed by 500 city residents and stakeholders. Stakeholders included City staff and elected officials, Fresno Housing Authority staff, nonprofit organizations, homeless housing and service providers, organizations serving people with disabilities, housing developers, civic organizations, and Fresno residents. Needs were also determined based on a review of previous local and regional plans, such as the Fresno General Plan (2015-2023), Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action Consolidated Plan FRESNO 80 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) (2018), the Fresno Madera 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness (2006-2016), the Fresno Parks Master Plan (2017), and the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (2016). Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Improvements: Survey respondents rated street, road, or sidewalk improvements as the highest public improvement need in the city. 69 percent of survey takers identified these improvements as a high need, 22 percent identified them as a moderate need. Biking or walking trails were also rated as a high need by 46 percent of survey respondents and as a moderate need by 30 percent of respondents. Survey respondents also prioritized ADA accessibility improvements, with 28 percent of respondents identifying them as a high need for the city and 43 percent identifying them as a moderate need. In addition to the needs rated in the survey, respondents also described a need for: • Improved lighting • Crosswalks and other pedestrian infrastructure • Bus stop shelters, trash cans and benches • ADA accessibility improvements in mobile home parks, and • Street trees Figure 7 shows the public facility and infrastructure needs in the city as ranked by survey respondents: FIGURE 7 – PUBLIC FACILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Consolidated Plan FRESNO 81 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Public improvement needs identified in the City of Fresno General Plan (2015-2023) and other local plans include: • Provide safe, well-maintained, accessible streets • Implement ADA accessibility improvements • Create an urban form that facilitates multi-modal connectivity • Create unified plans for Green Streets, using distinctive features reflecting Fresno’s landscape heritage • Preserve and strengthen Fresno’s overall image through design review and create a safe, walkable and attractive urban environment for the current and future generations of residents • Establish and maintain a continuous, safe, and easily accessible bikeways system throughout the metropolitan area to reduce vehicle use, improve air quality and the quality of life, and provide public health benefits • Establish a well-integrated network of pedestrian facilities to accommodate safe, convenient, practical, and inviting travel by walking, including for those with physical mobility and vision impairments How were these needs determined? The public improvement needs detailed above were generated based on input from multiple stakeholders consulted through interviews, public meetings, and a survey. These stakeholders included City staff and elected officials, Fresno Housing Authority staff, nonprofit organizations, homeless housing and service providers, organizations serving people with disabilities, housing developers, civic organizations, and Fresno residents. Needs were also determined based on a review of previous local and regional plans, such as the Fresno General Plan (2015-2023), Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018), the Fresno Madera 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness (2006-2016), the Fresno Parks Master Plan (2017), and the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (2016). Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Services: Public services, such as case management, childcare, transportation assistance, job training, and programming for youth and senior centers, are important to the City’s community development strategy. Needs identified by respondents to the Housing and Community Needs Survey were ranked as follows, with one as the highest priority: 1. Neighborhood cleanups 2. Drug education/ crime prevention 3. Child abuse prevention 4. After school services 5. Employment training 6. Domestic abuse services 7. Youth services 8. Medical and dental services Consolidated Plan FRESNO 82 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 9. Food banks/ community meals 10. Job search assistance 11. Transportation assistance 12. Senior services 13. Housing counseling 14. Legal services In particular, neighborhood cleanups were noted as a high need by 59 percent of survey respondents and as moderate needs by 31 percent of respondents. Drug abuse education/ crime prevention was noted as a high need by 61 percent of survey respondents and as a moderate need by 27 percent of respondents. 58 percent of respondents ranked child abuse prevention as a high need, and 29 percent ranked it as a moderate need. Survey participants and stakeholders also noted a need for additional services, including • LGBTQ-inclusive services and programming • Affordable childcare • Home visits for senior care • Senior programming • Mental health services • Enforcement of public safety in alleyways • Social programs, including mental health, recovery, recreation, job training, and food access • Improved public education • Mentoring programs • Municipal broadband • 24/7 bus service • Housing support • Parenting programs Figure 8 shows the public service needs as ranked by survey respondents. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 83 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 8- PUBLIC SERVICE NEEDS IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Public service needs identified in the City of Fresno General Plan (2015-2023) and other local plans include: • Provide youth development opportunities • Expand the range and availability of homelessness prevention strategies, increase immediate accessibility, and improve their long-term effectiveness • Provide transitional case managed services at all levels of homeless service access, especially in emergency shelter facilities and prior to discharge from public care programs/institutions, to ensure linkage to appropriate and necessary community resources and supports • Increase the level of coordinated and comprehensive services provision to the hard to serve and those who are not served, in areas of mental health, physical health and social wellbeing • Increase opportunities and avenues for community individual and business partnerships that will promote housing availability, employment and promote broader formal community supports • Increase job training, skills development and employment opportunities to increase self- reliance, decrease reliance on public supports and promote successful independent living and self-sufficiency Consolidated Plan FRESNO 84 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Support local business startups and encourage innovation by improving access to resources and capital and help overcome obstacles hampering economic development. • Cultivate a skilled, educated, and well-trained workforce by increasing educational attainment and the relevant job skill levels in order to appeal to local and nonlocal businesses • Maintain and improve community appearance through programs that prevent and abate blighting influences. How were these needs determined? The public services needs listed above were generated based on input from multiple stakeholders consulted through interviews, focus groups, public meetings, and a survey. These stakeholders included City staff and elected officials, Fresno Housing Authority staff, nonprofit organizations, homeless housing and service providers, organizations serving people with disabilities, housing developers, civic organizations, and Fresno residents. Needs were also determined based on a review of previous local and regional plans, such as the Fresno General Plan (2015-2023), Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018), the Fresno Madera 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness (2006-2016), the Fresno Parks Master Plan (2017), and the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (2016). Consolidated Plan FRESNO 85 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS MA-05 Overview Housing Market Analysis Overview While housing choices can be fundamentally limited by household income and purchasing power, the lack of affordable housing can be a significant hardship for low- and moderate- income households, preventing them from meeting other basic needs. Stakeholders and residents reported that affordable housing for families and individuals is a significant issue in the city of Fresno. While American Community Survey data shows that rents in the city have increased relatively moderately since 2010, there is a lack of housing in the city that is affordable to low- and moderate-income residents, and a high proportion of residents are cost- burdened or severely cost-burdened by housing costs. In addition to reviewing the current housing market conditions, this section analyzes the availability of assisted and public housing and facilities to serve homeless individuals and families. It also analyzes local economic conditions and summarizes existing economic development resources and programs that may be used to address community and economic development needs identified in the Needs Assessment. MA-10 Number of Housing Units – 91.210(a)&(b)(2) Introduction The 2011-2015 Five-Year American Community Survey estimates that there are 174,590 housing units in the City of Fresno (see Table 27). The largest share of units are single-family detached structures (61 percent), followed by units in small multifamily buildings of 5 to 19 units (14 percent). About 13 percent of the region’s units are in duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes. Units in large multifamily buildings (20 or more units) account for 7 percent of housing units, and 1-unit attached structures account for 3 percent of units. There are an estimated 4,105 units of other types of housing in the city, including mobile homes, RVs, and vans, which make up 2 percent of residences in the city. About 47 percent of the city’s units are owner-occupied, and 53 percent are renter-occupied (see Table 28). A large majority of owned housing in the city have at least two bedrooms: 15 percent have two bedrooms and 84 percent have three or more bedrooms. Rental units tend to be smaller: 22 percent of units are studios or one-bedroom units. The most common rental unit contains two bedrooms (43 percent), while more than one third (35 percent) of renters live in homes with three or more bedrooms. Input from stakeholders indicates that new construction of affordable rental units is the greatest housing need in the community. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 86 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) All residential properties by number of units TABLE 27 – RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES BY UNIT NUMBER Property Type Number % 1-unit detached structure 106,675 61% 1-unit, attached structure 4,985 3% 2-4 units 22,350 13% 5-19 units 24,980 14% 20 or more units 11,495 7% Mobile Home, boat, RV, van, etc 4,105 2% Total 174,590 100% Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Unit Size by Tenure TABLE 28 – UNIT SIZE BY TENURE Owners Renters Number % Number % No bedroom 320 0% 3,200 4% 1 bedroom 845 1% 15,265 18% 2 bedrooms 11,230 15% 37,010 43% 3 or more bedrooms 63,605 84% 30,435 35% Total 76,000 100% 85,910 100% Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Describe the number and targeting (income level/type of family served) of units assisted with federal, state, and local programs. According to the Fresno Housing Authority, more than 17,000 households were served with publicly assisted housing in 2019. The Fresno Housing Authority utilizes several types of assistance, including public housing, low-income housing tax credits, and housing choice vouchers. Through these programs, the Fresno Housing Authority manages 2,290 units of public housing; 2,414 LIHTC units, including 118 units of permanent supportive housing; and nearly 13,000 housing choice vouchers.15 Data on assisted housing from HUD indicate that 630 public housing units are located within the city of Fresno.16There are also 59 tax credit properties that together provide 5,794 units of 15 Fresno Housing Authority (n.d.) Portfolio. Retrieved from: http://fresnohousing.org/about/portfolio/ 16 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2019). Assisted Housing: National and Local. Retrieved from: https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/assthsg.html#null Consolidated Plan FRESNO 87 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) housing affordable to households with incomes at or below 60% AMI,17 and 2,203 Project Based Section 8 units in the city.18 Other multifamily properties include housing developed through HUD’s Section 202 and 811 programs, which provide affordable supportive housing for seniors and people with disabilities. Provide an assessment of units expected to be lost from the affordable housing inventory for any reason, such as expiration of Section 8 contracts. The Housing Element of the City’s General Plan notes that from 2015 to 2025, 1,449 units of federally assisted housing are at risk of converting to market-rate housing because of contracts that allow owners of project-based Section 8 units to opt out every five years.19 However, affordability covenants on individual projects or ownership by mission-driven nonprofit organizations may prevent conversion of some units. The plan also notes that all LIHTC projects placed into service up to 2010 may be at risk of conversion to market-rate housing, as they have passed the initial 15-year compliance period and owners may be permitted to exit the LIHTC program under certain circumstances. While HUD statistics indicate that most LIHTC properties remain affordable despite having passed the 15-year period of compliance, the complex nature of affordability restrictions associated with these projects put them at some level of risk of conversion. In total, the plan estimates that there are 5,339 affordable units (including both federal and LIHTC units) at risk of conversion to market-rate housing. The cost of developing replacement units is estimated at $1 billion. In addition to concerns surrounding the risk of conversion of federal and LIHTC affordable units, increases in housing prices and a loss of ‘naturally occurring’ affordable housing pose additional risks to low- and moderate-income households. Stakeholders interviewed as part of this planning process described increasing housing costs and a lack of affordable housing stock as primary concerns. Cost burden data shows that affordability needs are particularly severe for renters with incomes under 30% of HUD Area Median Family Income (HAMFI), affecting over 15,000 households. Input collected from stakeholders and public meeting attendees strongly suggests that a scarcity of affordable rental units combined with low incomes and high unemployment makes housing increasingly unaffordable to Fresno residents. 17 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (n.d.) LIHTC Database. Retrieved from: https://lihtc.huduser.gov/ 18 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2019). Assisted Housing: National and Local. Retrieved from: https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/assthsg.html#null 19 City of Fresno. (2017). Fresno General Plan: 2015-2023 Housing Element. Retrieved from: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2018/01/FresnoHEAdoptedApril2017smallfile.pdf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 88 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) On the ownership side, income and home value data indicate that starter home prices in the city are out of reach for many moderate- and middle- income households. Affordability data in the Needs Assessment supports this, with cost burdens impacting considerable shares of households up to 100% HAMFI. In terms of unit size, overcrowding impacts a large number of households, particularly renters. Considering that the majority of rental units contain two bedrooms or fewer (65 percent), future affordable housing development should reflect continued need for 3+ bedroom rental units for larger families. Describe the need for specific types of housing: Data discussed in the Housing Need Assessment and in the following section indicates the need for rental housing for very low-income households. The greatest need is for affordable rental housing units, particularly units that are affordable to households with income at or below 30 percent of the area median income. Stakeholders interviewed in the development of the Consolidated Plan also emphasized the need for: • Affordable rental housing, including multifamily housing • Affordable homeownership opportunities, including starter homes • Affordable senior housing • Affordable housing for a variety of family sizes • Housing affordable to people with very low incomes (30% AMI and below) • Housing accessible to people with disabilities, with supportive services • Housing that accepts Housing Choice Vouchers • Housing rehab for elderly residents • Family housing • Housing with supportive services, including case management services, medical, mental health, childcare • Housing with supportive services for people transitioning from homelessness • Rehabilitation of existing housing stock • Housing in safe areas with access to opportunity MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing - 91.210(a) Introduction This section reviews housing costs and affordability in the City of Fresno. The median home value in the city is estimated at $177,500 (see Table 29). Home values in the city fell during the years following the Great Recession and have not recovered to pre-recession levels (see Figure 9). Median rent is $758 in the City of Fresno, an 8 percent increase since 2009. 60.6 percent of the city’s rental units cost between $500 and $999 per month, and 15.5 percent have rents under $500 per month. Rental rates are $1,000 or more for about 24 percent of rental housing Consolidated Plan FRESNO 89 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) units (see Table 30). Median rents in the city have increased moderately but consistently since 2009 (see Figure 10). The need for improvement or construction of affordable housing is one of the most commonly identified housing issues in the city, with data and local perceptions both indicating affordability issues, particularly for households with incomes below 80% of the area median. Ability to afford housing is tied to other needs identified in the city, including homelessness, housing and services for people with disabilities, housing and services for people living with HIV/AIDS, senior housing, and availability of housing for people re-entering the community from long-term care facilities or other institutions. Cost of Housing TABLE 29 – COST OF HOUSING Base Year: 2009 Most Recent Year: 2015 % Change Median Home Value 256,100 177,500 (31%) Median Contract Rent 699 758 8% Data Source: 2005-2009 ACS (Base Year), 2011-2015 ACS (Most Recent Year) TABLE 30 - RENT PAID Rent Paid Number % Less than $500 13,345 15.5% $500-999 52,045 60.6% $1,000-1,499 17,275 20.1% $1,500-1,999 2,185 2.5% $2,000 or more 1,060 1.2% Total 85,910 100.0% Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Housing Affordability TABLE 31 – HOUSING AFFORDABILITY % Units affordable to Households earning Renter Owner 30% HAMFI 3,980 No Data 50% HAMFI 12,205 4,150 80% HAMFI 47,765 14,445 100% HAMFI No Data 22,165 Total 63,950 40,760 Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 90 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Monthly Rent TABLE 32 – MONTHLY RENT Monthly Rent ($) Efficiency (no bedroom) 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom Fair Market Rent 697 771 958 1,368 1,599 High HOME Rent 697 771 929 1,065 1,169 Low HOME Rent 525 562 675 778 868 Data Source: HUD FMR and HOME Rents FIGURE 9: MEDIAN HOME VALUE, CITY OF FRESNO, 2009-2017 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 91 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 10: MEDIAN CONTRACT RENT, CITY OF FRESNO, 2009-2017 Is there sufficient housing for households at all income levels? Table 31 estimates the number of units affordable to renters and owners at a variety of income levels, which can be compared to the number of households at each income level, as provided in Table 6 of the Needs Assessment. According to CHAS estimates, there are 25,190 renter households with incomes under 30 percent HAMFI in the city but only 3,980 rental units affordable at that income level (see Table 31). There are 17,465 renter households with incomes between 30 and 50 percent HAMFI in the city but only 12,205 rental units affordable at that income level. Thus, there is insufficient rental housing for households with very low incomes. There appears to be a sufficient number of renter units affordable to renter households at the other income levels. However, these figures do not take into account unit condition or size; nor do they reflect the possibility that a unit that would be affordable to a low or moderate income household may be unavailable to them because it is occupied by a higher income household. Turning to owners, there are an estimated 11,245 owner households with incomes 50% HAMFI and below in the city, but only 4,150 owner-occupied housing units affordable at that income Consolidated Plan FRESNO 92 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) level (see Table 31). At the next income levels there appear to be adequate affordable units. As with rental housing, these figures do not take into account housing size or condition, or the possibility that higher income households will choose to occupy lower cost units. The National Low Income Housing Coalition’s Out of Reach data examines rental housing rates relative to income levels for counties and metro areas throughout the U.S. To afford a two- bedroom rental unit at the Fresno MSA Fair Market Rent (FMR) of $956 without being cost- burdened would require an annual wage of $38,240. This amount translates to a 40-hour work week at an hourly wage of $18.38, a 61-hour work week at minimum wage, or a 57-hour work week at the MSA’s average renter wage of $12.81. To afford a three-bedroom unit at the FMR of $1,364 would require an annual wage of $54,560. How is affordability of housing likely to change considering changes to home values and/or rents? Median home value decreased by 31 percent from the 2005-2009 ACS to the 2013-2017 ACS, and median rent increased by 8 percent (see Table 29). While home values fell and rents stagnated within the period during the Great Recession, housing values are recovering more quickly in recent years, and rents have surpassed their pre-recession levels (see Figures 9 and 10). Affordability has, in turn, decreased, particularly for renters. A tight rental market, a lack of affordable for-sale housing, and slow wage growth all indicate that housing affordability is likely to continue as an issue in the city. How do HOME rents / Fair Market Rent compare to Area Median Rent? How might this impact your strategy to produce or preserve affordable housing? Table 32 shows HUD Fair Market Rents and HOME rents for the region. The median contract rent of $758 is slightly less than the fair market rent for a 1-bedroom unit. However, many lower- income families with children may require larger units, which are largely unaffordable to those working low-wage jobs. Note that this data does not reflect housing condition, which is an important consideration. While the rent may be affordable, substandard housing conditions may make a unit unsafe or lead to exceptionally high utility costs, negating any savings in rent as compared to a more expensive unit. Discussion Based on 2011‐2015 ACS data provided by HUD, it appears that there is a need for additional housing for those at or below 30% HAMFI. There are only 3,980 rental units identified that meet that need, resulting in a shortage of more than 21,000 units relative to households in this group. This also supports the need for Section 202 and Section 8 developments. There is also a need for owner housing for those at or below 50% HAMFI. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 93 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing – 91.210(a) Introduction This section examines the condition of housing in the city of Fresno, including the presence of selected housing conditions: (1) lack of complete plumbing facilities, (2) lack of complete kitchen facilities, (3) more than one person per room, and (4) cost burden greater than 30%. This section also examines the age of housing stock, vacancy rate and suitability of vacant housing for rehabilitation, and the risk of lead-based paint hazards. Renters in the city of Fresno are more likely than owners to experience one or more of the selected housing conditions. About 63 percent of renter-occupied units and 34 percent of owner-occupied units have at least one of the conditions described above (see Table 33). CHAS data discussed in the Needs Assessment indicates that cost burdens are by far the most common housing condition. About 32 percent of owner-occupied units in the city have one selected condition (24,060 units), and 2 percent have two or more selected conditions (1,680 units). In contrast, 54 percent of renter-occupied units have one condition (46,365 units), and 9 percent have two conditions (7,925 units). These figures indicate that rental units are more likely to be physically substandard (i.e., lack a complete kitchen or plumbing). Less than 1 percent of both renter- and owner-occupied units have three or more conditions (165 renter-occupied units and 45 owner-occupied units). Age of housing reflects periods of development in Fresno. The city contains a significant supply of housing built prior to 1980, of which 37,810 units are owner-occupied (50 percent of owner- occupied units) and 50,135 are rental units (58 percent of rental units) (see Table 34). 50 percent of owner-occupied units and 42 percent of rental units were built in 1980 or later. Renters are more likely than owners to occupy housing built between 1950 and 1979, while owners are more likely to occupy the newest housing, built in 2000 or later. While some older units may be well-maintained, the considerable share of housing built prior to 1980 indicates potential need for rehabilitation assistance. Definitions For the purpose of this Consolidated Plan, the City of Fresno defines units to be in “standard condition” if they meet HUD Section 8 housing quality standards. A unit is defined as “substandard” if it lacks complete plumbing, a complete kitchen, or heating fuel (or uses heating fuel that is wood, kerosene, or coal). A unit is “substandard but suitable for rehabilitation” if it lacks complete plumbing, a complete kitchen or a reliable and safe heating system but has some limited infrastructure that can be improved upon. These units are likely to have deferred maintenance and may have some structural damage such as leaking roofs, deteriorated interior surfaces, and inadequate insulation. They may not be part of public water or sewer systems but have sufficient systems to allow for clean water and adequate waste disposal. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 94 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Condition of Units TABLE 33 - CONDITION OF UNITS Condition of Units Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Number % Number % With one selected Condition 24,060 32% 46,365 54% With two selected Conditions 1,680 2% 7,925 9% With three selected Conditions 30 0% 135 0% With four selected Conditions 15 0% 30 0% No selected Conditions 50,220 66% 31,460 37% Total 76,005 100% 85,915 100% Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Year Unit Built TABLE 34 – YEAR UNIT BUILT Year Unit Built Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Number % Number % 2000 or later 15,000 20% 10,690 12% 1980-1999 23,190 31% 25,095 29% 1950-1979 29,025 38% 38,900 45% Before 1950 8,785 12% 11,235 13% Total 76,000 101% 85,920 99% Data Source: 2011-2015 CHAS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 95 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 11: NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS BUILT BY TIME PERIOD, CITY OF FRESNO Consolidated Plan FRESNO 96 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 97 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard TABLE 35 – RISK OF LEAD-BASED PAINT Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Number % Number % Total number of units built before 1980 37,810 50% 50,135 58% Housing units built before 1980 with children present 17,750 23% 7,550 9% Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS (Total Units) 2011-2015 CHAS (Units with Children present) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 98 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Vacant Units TABLE 36 - VACANT UNITS Vacant Units Number Percent For rent 4,178 36.3% For sale 697 6.1% Rented or sold but not occupied 1,611 14.0% For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 687 6.0% Other vacancies 4,337 37.7% Total 11,510 100% Data Source: 2013-2017 ACS Need for Owner and Rental Rehabilitation Community input from local stakeholders and residents indicates substantial need for owner- occupied housing rehabilitation. About 46 percent of survey respondents rated “help for homeowners to make housing improvements” as a high need in the city, and 33 percent rated it as a moderate need. Data regarding housing conditions indicates that 1,725 owner-occupied units (about 2 percent of total owner-occupied units) in the city have at least two housing conditions, which are likely to include cost burdens and one other condition (overcrowding, lack of complete kitchen, or lack of complete plumbing). Additionally, 8,785 owner-occupied housing units (12 percent of total owner-occupied units) in the city were built before 1950, indicating the highest risk for deferred maintenance and rehabilitation need. 29,025 units of owner-occupied housing (38 percent of total owner-occupied units) in the city were built between 1950 and 1980, and as this housing ages, maintenance needs will continue to grow. Owners are less likely to lack complete kitchens or plumbing and therefore are less likely to live in substandard housing. However, housing age indicates that some owner-occupied units are at risk of deferred maintenance and may currently or in the near future be in need of some rehabilitation, given that 37,810 units (50 percent of total owner-occupied units) were built prior to 1980. Additionally, seniors living on Social Security or retirement income who have paid off their mortgages may now be unable to afford necessary repairs and maintenance as their homes age. Results of public participation efforts and data on the city’s housing stock also indicate a high level of need for rehabilitation of rental units. About 55 percent of survey respondents rated “rehabilitation of rental housing” as a high need, and 28 percent rated it as a moderate need. 11,235 rental housing units in the city (13 percent of total rental units) were built before 1950, and 38,900 units were built between 1950 and 1980 (45 percent of total rental units). Further, a greater number of rental units (8,090) than owner units (1,725) have at least two housing conditions, likely including cost burdens and at least one other housing condition. Combined, Consolidated Plan FRESNO 99 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) these factors indicate that while there is a high level of need for rehabilitation of both renter- and owner-occupied housing, renters in Fresno experience the highest levels of need. Estimated Number of Housing Units Occupied by Low or Moderate Income Families with LBP Hazards Exposure to lead-based paint represents one of the most significant environmental threats from a housing perspective. Housing conditions can significantly affect public health, and exposure to lead may cause a range of health problems for adults and children. The major source of lead exposure comes from lead-contaminated dust found in deteriorating buildings, including residential properties built before 1978 that contain lead-based paint. Unfortunately, measuring the exact number of housing units with lead-based paint hazards is difficult. However, risk factors for exposure to lead include housing old enough to have been initially painted with lead-based paint (i.e., pre-1978), households that include young children, and households in poverty. Table 35 identifies the total number of housing units built before 1980 and the total number of renter and owner units built before 1980 that house children under age 6. In the City of Fresno, this includes 17,750 owner-occupied units (23 percent of total owner-occupied housing units) and 7,550 renter-occupied units (9 percent of total renter- occupied housing units) with at least two risk factors for exposure to lead-based paint (built before 1980 and housing young children). Consolidated Plan FRESNO 100 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing – 91.210(b) Introduction The needs of public housing residents and voucher holders are different from those of the city’s overall low- and moderate-income population primarily in that these residents are housed in stable and decent housing. With this need met, residents are able to work on other needs that families typically face in addition to housing insecurity. These other needs frequently include childcare, healthcare, employment, transportation, and food. Totals Number of Units TABLE 37 – TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS BY PROGRAM TYPE Program Type Certificate Mod- Rehab Public Housing Vouchers Total Project - based Tenant - based Special Purpose Voucher Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Family Unification Program Disabled* # of units vouchers available 0 0 766 6,853 11 6,842 523 1,803 991 # of accessible units *includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Data Source: PIC (PIH Information Center) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 101 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe the supply of public housing developments. Describe the number and physical condition of public housing units in the jurisdiction, including those that are participating in an approved Public Housing Agency Plan: According to HUD PIC data, there are 766 public housing units in the City of Fresno, which are part of 5 traditional public housing sites. The FH reports in its 2020 Annual Plan that it has 506 public housing units. The Fairview Heights Terrace is a 74-unit multi-family development. Pacific Gardens is a 56-unit apartment complex built in 1970; its last major renovation took place in 2011. Parc Grove Commons is a newer complex, built in 2011, which is composed of 215 townhomes and apartments. Yosemite Village contains 69 townhomes first built in 1952. The development has completed four major renovations between 1992 and 2009. Public Housing Condition TABLE 38 - PUBLIC HOUSING CONDITION Public Housing Development Average Inspection Score Pacific Gardens, 5161 E. Kings Canyon Road, Fresno, CA 82 Yosemite Village, 1132 N. Sherman Court, Fresno, CA 77 Yosemite Village - Phase 2, 939 W. California Avenue, Fresno, CA 90 Parc Grove Commons II, 2086 N. Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 89 Fairview Heights Terrace, 640 E. California Avenue, Fresno, CA 83 Fresno Average Score 84 Describe the restoration and revitalization needs of public housing units in the jurisdiction: The FH 2020 Annual Plan states that three of the city’s public housing sites are being considered for disposition and conversion to a different low-income housing type or community facility. These three sites are Pacific Gardens, Yosemite Village – Phase 2, and Fairview Heights Terrace. Seventy-four of the units at Yosemite Village – Phase 2 are also being considered for demolition or disposition to be converted to a Low-Income Housing Tax Credit site. Three sites are also planned for conversion under the RAD program between 2019 and 2021: Yosemite Village (69 units), Parc Grove II (31 units), and Pacific Gardens (22 units). Conversion of these sites under the RAD program may include either demolition, rehabilitation or new construction at these sites. Describe the public housing agency's strategy for improving the living environment of low- and moderate-income families residing in public housing: Consolidated Plan FRESNO 102 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) As part of its on-going efforts to improve resident and staff safety and its properties, the FH conducts several joint projects with partners such as the Fresno Police, Sanger Police and California Highway Patrol to build relationships and provide information on property safety, telephone scams and car seat safety. The FH also trains its staff in de-escalation techniques, emergency protocols and conducts property safety assessments. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 103 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services – 91.210(c) Introduction This section summarizes homeless facilities and services. It was completed with data from the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care, including the 2018 Housing Inventory Count. Facilities and Housing Targeted to Homeless Households Based on a review of emergency, transitional, and permanent supportive housing that serves homeless persons in Fresno and Madera counties, there are an estimated 411 year round emergency shelter beds, about 55 percent of which are individual beds (225 beds) and about 45 percent of which are family beds (186 beds). The counties’ homeless facilities also include 114 transitional housing beds and 1,931 permanent housing beds, including 1,353 permanent supportive housing beds. TABLE 39 - FACILITIES AND HOUSING TARGETED TO HOMELESS HOUSEHOLDS Emergency Shelter Beds Transitional Housing Beds Permanent Supportive Housing Beds Year-Round Beds (Current & New) Voucher / Seasonal / Overflow Beds Current & New Current & New Under Development Households with Adult(s) and Child(ren) 186 0 47 536 Households with Only Adults 215 0 67 817 Chronically Homeless Households N/A 0 N/A 873 Veterans 41 0 44 752 Unaccompanied Youth 26 0 4 0 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 104 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe mainstream services, such as health, mental health, and employment services to the extent those services are used to complement services targeted to homeless persons There are a variety of mainstream services that are used to complement targeted services for homeless persons. The Continuum of Care focuses on supporting coordination and collaboration among these systems so that homeless persons can access mainstream resources to assist them in transitioning to and remaining stable in permanent housing. Examples of health, mental health, and employment services that complement services targeted to homeless persons include: • Workforce Connection (the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board) provides basic career services, career guidance, skill level evaluations, educational and training opportunities, job readiness workshops, training, and supportive services. • The County of Fresno Department of Behavioral Health provides employment services and preparation, job placement, education support, computer lab access, and mental health services. • The County of Fresno Department of Public Health provides specialty care programs, including the Medically Indigent Services Program, which assists qualified low-income Fresno County residents who have a medical need, but have no source of health coverage available and no other way to pay for necessary medical care. • The Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission provides educational programs, including Head Start and ABE/GED programs; employment training for young adults; and financial and social enterprise services. • West Care provides treatment and rehabilitation, veterans services, transitional reentry programs, and crisis psychiatric response services. • Kings View provides mental health services, drugs and alcohol treatment, and youth skills programs. • The Poverello House provides a medical clinic with free health and dental services, substance abuse and rehabilitation treatment, case management services to navigate housing and mental health services, and classes on peer counseling, life skills, agency referrals, health education, and self-esteem. • The Holy Cross Center for Women and Children provides counseling and referral services, education and skills training, clothing distribution, laundry and shower facilities, social activities, and a six-week summer program for children and teens. • Centro La Familia Advocacy Services provides victims assistance programs, parenting and families programs, navigation of mental health support and services, health insurance enrollment, and CalFresh enrollment. • The Marjaree Mason Center provides counseling, crisis support, and domestic violence education and training. List and describe services and facilities that meet the needs of homeless persons, particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth. If the services and facilities are listed on screen SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure or screen Consolidated Plan FRESNO 105 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services, describe how these facilities and services specifically address the needs of these populations. Services and facilities that meet the needs of persons experiencing homelessness include: • MAP (Multi-Agency Access Program) is an integrated intake process that includes screening and service navigation for social and health services, public benefits, housing, and other immediate necessities. MAP is funded by the County of Fresno Department of Behavioral Health. • Multiple organizations in Fresno provide outreach to people experiencing homelessness. For example, the Poverello House provides access to clothing, showers, laundry, healthcare, and food, and the Fresno Rescue Mission provides a mobile community response unit, food services, chapel services, warming and sobering centers, and 24- hour emergency services with case management, and educational programs, including computer learning centers and GED and literacy programs; behavioral health programs; life skills training; and counseling. • Multiple organizations provide emergency and transitional housing for persons experiencing homelessness, including Fresno County, the Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission, the Marjaree Mason Center, Turning Point of Central California, West Care, and Valley Teen Ranch, among others. • Multiple organizations and agencies provide services to support people experiencing homelessness in transitioning to permanent housing, including permanent supportive housing and rapid rehousing services, including the Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission, the Fresno Housing Authority, Turning Point of Central California, and West Care, among others. • Multiple organizations and agencies provide transitional and permanent housing opportunities for veterans and their families, including the VA Central California Health Care System, which provides emergency shelter for veterans; West Care, which provides transitional housing and rapid rehousing for veterans; the Fresno Housing Authority, which provides permanent housing for veterans. • Multiple organizations provide emergency shelter and transitional housing options for unaccompanied youth, including the Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission, which provides emergency shelter for unaccompanied youth, and Valley Teen Ranch, which provides transitional housing for unaccompanied youth. MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services – 91.210(d) Introduction This section describes the housing and social service needs of the region’s special populations including the elderly, frail elderly, domestic violence victims, residents with diagnosis of HIV/AIDS, and residents with substance abuse, mental health, or disability diagnosis. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 106 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Baseline Table TABLE 40– HOPWA ASSISTANCE BASELINE Type of HOWA Assistance Number of Units Designated or Available for People with HIV/AIDS and their families TBRA 16 PH in facilities 0 STRMU 15 ST or TH facilities 0 PH placement 0 Data Source: HOPWA CAPER and HOPWA Beneficiary Verification Worksheet HOPWA Assistance, Including the elderly, frail elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical, developmental), persons with alcohol or other drug addictions, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, public housing residents and any other categories the jurisdiction may specify, and describe their supportive housing needs The Elderly and People with Disabilities The elderly and people with disabilities need housing that provides access to transit or transportation services in order to facilitate access to employment, resources, and services. There is a need for supportive housing in areas close to transit and within short distances to needed resources and services. These needs should be primary considerations in the location of supportive housing for people with disabilities and seniors. Housing should also focus on integrating these populations into the community and reducing social isolation through programming and facilitating access to resources and services. In addition to housing located near transportation and needed services, people with intellectual and developmental disabilities often need case management or life skills programming that does not violate direct service requirements. Persons Living with HIV/AIDS Persons living with HIV/AIDS need low-barrier housing free from requirements such as those surrounding drug testing, sobriety, criminal background, and medical appointments. A ‘housing first’ model in which housing is provided without these kinds of barriers is needed. Similar to other vulnerable populations, persons living with HIV/AIDS need housing that provides easy access to health services, resources, and employment. Persons living with HIV/AIDS may need case management services, although stakeholders interviewed as part of this planning process emphasized that supportive services should not be required for people living with HIV/AIDS to access housing. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 107 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Public Housing Residents Public housing residents may have a need for supportive services such as access to childcare and afterschool programs, transportation to and from these and other services and employment, health services, access to fresh and affordable food, and workforce development and training services. Describe programs for ensuring that persons returning from mental and physical health institutions receive appropriate supportive housing Supportive housing is frequently a need for people with mental health and substance abuse disorders after being discharged from inpatient treatment in order to prevent homelessness. Persons returning from these institutions need access to affordable housing and health services and may also require supportive services such as case management and transportation assistance. Multiple supportive housing providers in Fresno make mental and physical health services available through supportive housing. For example, West Care provides treatment and rehabilitation and crisis psychiatric response services; Kings View provides mental health services and drugs and alcohol treatment; and the Poverello House provides a medical clinic with free health and dental services, substance abuse and rehabilitation treatment, case management services to navigate mental health services, and classes on peer counseling, life skills, agency referrals, health education, and self-esteem. Additional supportive services available in the community are described in section MA-30. Supportive services are also available outside of supportive housing programs. For example, the County of Fresno Department of Behavioral Health provides employment services and preparation, job placement, education support, computer lab access, and mental health services. Local service providers are well-networked and often make referrals to one another to provide shelter, temporary food, clothing, and other immediate services. Persons returning from mental and physical health institutions also need access to housing that is affordable, close to needed health services, and accessible to transportation options. The use of funds such as those provided through the HOME program to support the development of affordable housing that provides access to services and transportation facilitates persons with mental and physical health challenges in accessing needed care and resources and supports the use of in-home services. Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e) with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. 91.315(e) The City of Fresno’s first year Annual Action Plan specifies the activities it plans to support over the 2020 program year to address housing and supportive service needs. These include: Consolidated Plan FRESNO 108 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Housing rehabilitation • Senior paint program • Affordable housing development or rehabilitation • Community Housing Development Organization set-aside • Tenant-based rental assistance • Nonprofit public services • PARCS after school program • PARCS senior hot meals program • Neighborhood street and sidewalk improvements • Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS/HIV • Fair housing • Micro-enterprise assistance For entitlement/consortia grantees: Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e) with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. (91.220(2)) The City of Fresno will address housing and supportive service needs of residents through the development of new affordable rental housing through a Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO), which will meet HUD requirements that any new construction with five or more dwelling units have a minimum of 5 percent of units be accessible to individuals with mobility impairments and an additional 2 percent be accessible to individuals with sensory impairments. The City will also fund a housing rehabilitation program, which may be used by seniors to complete home improvements they could otherwise not afford, thereby allowing them to stay in their homes longer, and/or by people with disabilities who need accessibility modifications to remain in their homes. The City’s HOPWA program will fund rent, mortgage, and utility assistance for homelessness prevention and tenant-based rental assistance. MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing – 91.210(e) Negative Effects of Public Policies on Affordable Housing and Residential Investment In the 2019 report, “Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates,” several researchers writing on behalf of the grassroots organization Faith in the Valley found that evictions were an important factor in overall housing instability. Eviction records also posed a major barrier for many residents seeking to obtain housing, particularly quality affordable housing. The report found that most evictions occurred for various reason, primarily due to late rent. Renters who were one month late with rent or owed one month’s rent plus fees made up 72% of all rent-related evictions. Another 11% of rent-related evictions occurred due to the tenant owing less than one-month’s rent. Other reasons for evictions included domestic disturbances, housing tenants who were not on the lease, owning unauthorized pets, marijuana or other substance use, or without any reason given. Fees associated with court and other potential Consolidated Plan FRESNO 109 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) costs tended to exacerbate the financial hardship for tenants, making the process of finding new housing even more strenuous. Most importantly, evictions remain on an individual’s rental history for 7-years, serving as a major barrier to obtaining quality affordable housing for an extended period of time. The report Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates identified “the inadequate supply of decent quality affordable housing” as a causal factor in evictions, explaining that the smaller supply leads to greater demand for affordable units, and that the impact to evicted tenants is much more severe than the impact to landlords who can quickly fill a vacant unit. Policy solutions proposed in the report include the creation of anti-displacement ordinances and the implementation of initiatives identified in the 2015-2023 Housing Element. Additional anti- displacement ordinances in Fresno would fill important gaps left by the state’s Tenant Protection Act, which provides a cap on rent increases to 5% plus inflation, up to twice per year, for residents in a unit longer than 12 months. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 110 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets – 91.215 (f) Introduction This section outlines the employment, labor force, and educational attainment data which informed the development of priorities and goals in this Plan. Economic Development Market Analysis Business Activity TABLE 41 - BUSINESS ACTIVITY Business by Sector Number of Workers Number of Jobs Share of Workers % Share of Jobs % Jobs less workers % Agriculture, Mining, Oil & Gas Extraction 9,735 2,532 6 1 -5 Arts, Entertainment, Accommodations 19,100 21,409 12 12 0 Construction 8,030 8,592 5 5 0 Education and Health Care Services 35,288 45,380 23 26 3 Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate 7,418 10,736 5 6 1 Information 2,278 3,360 1 2 0 Manufacturing 13,152 13,049 9 7 -1 Other Services 6,305 8,112 4 5 1 Professional, Scientific, Management Services 8,383 10,881 5 6 1 Public Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Retail Trade 19,326 22,191 13 13 0 Transportation and Warehousing 4,913 5,239 3 3 0 Wholesale Trade 7,087 8,438 5 5 0 Total 141,015 159,919 -- -- -- Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS (Workers), 2015 Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (Jobs) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 111 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Labor Force TABLE 42 - LABOR FORCE Total Population in the Civilian Labor Force 231,175 Civilian Employed Population 16 years and over 198,115 Unemployment Rate 14.30 Unemployment Rate for Ages 16-24 29.34 Unemployment Rate for Ages 25-65 9.25 Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS TABLE 43 – OCCUPATIONS BY SECTOR Occupations by Sector Number of People Management, business and financial 35,735 Farming, fisheries and forestry occupations 10,375 Service 23,895 Sales and office 49,750 Construction, extraction, maintenance and repair 22,430 Production, transportation and material moving 11,190 Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Travel Time TABLE 44 - TRAVEL TIME Travel Time Number Percentage < 30 Minutes 144,385 78% 30-59 Minutes 30,795 17% 60 or More Minutes 9,080 5% Total 184,260 100% Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 112 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Education: Educational Attainment by Employment Status (Population 16 and Older) TABLE 45 - EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT BY EMPLOYMENT STATUS Educational Attainment In Labor Force Civilian Employed Unemployed Not in Labor Force Less than high school graduate 29,680 6,195 23,200 High school graduate (includes equivalency) 34,750 6,370 17,130 Some college or Associate's degree 55,140 8,040 18,820 Bachelor's degree or higher 40,275 2,420 6,715 Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Educational Attainment by Age TABLE 46 - EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT BY AGE Age 18–24 yrs 25–34 yrs 35–44 yrs 45–65 yrs 65+ yrs Less than 9th grade 1,330 5,420 7,640 16,405 10,280 9th to 12th grade, no diploma 9,495 10,420 8,275 10,920 4,980 High school graduate, GED, or alternative 15,830 20,315 14,065 23,880 10,760 Some college, no degree 27,385 23,300 14,450 24,805 11,015 Associate's degree 3,505 6,475 4,670 8,425 2,895 Bachelor's degree 3,080 11,245 7,860 14,930 6,855 Graduate or professional degree 175 4,015 3,670 7,710 3,560 Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Educational Attainment – Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months TABLE 47 – MEDIAN EARNINGS IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS Educational Attainment Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Less than high school graduate 17,038 High school graduate (includes equivalency) 24,919 Some college or Associate's degree 30,402 Bachelor's degree 50,006 Graduate or professional degree 66,938 Data Source: 2011-2015 ACS Consolidated Plan FRESNO 113 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Based on the Business Activity table above, what are the major employment sectors within your jurisdiction? As shown in the Business Activity table above, the employment sectors in Fresno with the largest number of jobs are education and health care services (45,380 jobs or 26 percent of all jobs); retail trade (22,191 jobs or 13 percent); and arts, entertainment, and accommodations (21,409 jobs or 12 percent). The jobs in which the most city residents are employed reflect these major employment sectors. The largest numbers of Fresno residents are employed in education and health care services (35,288 workers or 23 percent of all workers); retail trade (19,326 workers or 13 percent); and arts, entertainment, and accommodations (19,100 workers or 12 percent). The largest mismatch between the share of workers (i.e., employed residents) and the share of jobs by sector is also in agriculture, mining, and oil and gas extraction (5 percentage point difference in the share of workers and the share of jobs). In this way, agriculture, mining, and oil and gas extraction workers make up a much larger proportion of the population in the city of Fresno than do agriculture, mining, and oil and gas extraction jobs of city’s jobs, indicating that these workers live in Fresno but commute outside of the city for employment. Differences between the share of workers and share of jobs by sector are 3 percentage points or less in all other sectors. Describe the workforce and infrastructure needs of the business community: The City of Fresno Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (2015-2020) identifies needs related to workforce and business infrastructure. Workforce development and infrastructure goals identified in the CEDS include: • Upgrade and expand the capacity for skill training and development in Fresno in order to have a workforce that is compatible with current labor demands and commensurate with the economic growth trends of Fresno County and the industrial diversification of the economy that Fresno City and Fresno County are striving to attract to the area. • Stabilize and enhance the business and economic environment of the overall area of the City of Fresno. Activities should be designed and pursued that will help the City attract more industrial diversification and become a greater participant in the regional economic sector while maintaining the viability of the existing retail, commercial and distribution entities. • Provide assistance to existing local businesses, through supporting area revitalization initiatives of existing commercial retail centers, where needed, and improving the access to and availability of capital and credit for local businesses. • Promote labor support programs which enhance the quality of the target area’s labor force and assist them in obtaining new employment opportunities. • Develop collaborative relationships between all private and other government entities within the Central Valley to affect and maintain a comprehensive and coordinated economic development process. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 114 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Additional opportunities identified in the CEDS include: • Expansion of workforce training programs • Expansion of business retention programs • Attraction of large companies • Marketing agriculture as an area strength • Re-Branding the City of Fresno • Encouragement of innovation and entrepreneurship, and • Positive media coverage The Greater Fresno Region DRIVE plan (2019) also identifies workforce and infrastructure needs and opportunities, including: • A world-class “precision food systems” industry cluster that supports advanced, sustainable agricultural production and food manufacturing, focused on cross- disciplinary engineering capabilities in digitalization and data science, mechatronics, equipment, and systems integration • A suite of best-in-class supports for small business owners including a “Fail Fast Incubator” to help validate and support early business concepts, hands-on back-office support and technical assistance to help existing businesses scale, and a flexible pool of capital to directly address the unique capital challenges for small businesses owned by women and people of color • Deploy a patient capital fund and increase economic development capacity to proactively attract and retain the types of jobs and employers needed in the Greater Fresno Region • Develop an innovative, end-to-end talent pipeline and training program for diverse aviation professionals, the strategic framework needed to position the San Joaquin Valley to capture the emerging electric aviation market, and the blueprint for a world- class electric aviation testing lab and innovation hub • A suite of initiatives that meaningfully support the monitoring, re-investment, and distribution of the region’s water to better ensure low-income and vulnerable populations have access to safe, affordable, and clean groundwater while ensuring the Greater Fresno Region has the water resources needed to help agricultural and other businesses thrive • A multi-pronged strategy to reshape the workforce development system, including 1:1 case management for at-risk residents, family support and training funds, and a career network hub for work-based learning • Expand evidence-based programs including high-quality early childcare and education, group prenatal care, nurse and para-professional home visits, and 2-generation coaching to ensure a healthy and equitable start to life • Building the culture and technical infrastructure for longitudinal, cross-agency data sharing, starting with a proof-of-concept pilot for children ages 0-5 and their families • A multi-pronged strategy aimed at increasing the number of bachelor’s degree graduates in Fresno, including growing dual enrollment, providing significant financial support to Consolidated Plan FRESNO 115 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) students for college completion, providing job training and placement support, and creating a regional college pipeline coordinating entity • An integrated K-16 collaborative that leverages all regional institutions, increases the educated citizenry in the region, promotes degree attainment through occupation pathways for all learners within prioritized occupations, and meets the region’s economic and labor market needs • A multi-pronged approach aimed at both attraction and retention for teachers, and which includes targeted messaging, financial support, Guided Pathways support, professional development, and exploration of a community schools model • Expand the impact of a world-class medical school to Fresno and the San Joaquin Valley to improve health through training and research • A campaign to counteract “brain drain”, to grow the skilled workforce, and improve Fresno’s human capital value proposition • A suite of innovative, wealth creating tools and programs to support communities of color in Fresno • Innovative, tangible, community-centered solutions that support our downtown economy, transportation, and cultural assets • An 11-mile transit corridor in south and central Fresno that will foster healthier, more prosperous, sustainable, and better-connected neighborhoods through infill and equity- based transit-oriented development • A next generation civic infrastructure that advances authentic place-based, resident- centered strategies to transform power relationships in under-resourced, extreme poverty neighborhoods that lead to healthy sustainable communities • Overcome barriers to equitable, affordable housing by creating, renovating, and ensuring access to over 12,000 quality, affordable units and vouchers by 2030 Community stakeholders also noted the need for workforce training and job search assistance for low- and moderate-income households. 58 percent of survey respondents described employment training as a high need, and 51 percent rated job search assistance as a high need. Describe any major changes that may have an economic impact, such as planned local or regional public or private sector investments or initiatives that have affected or may affect job and business growth opportunities during the planning period. Describe any needs for workforce development, business support or infrastructure these changes may create. Plans for economic and workforce development in Fresno and the region are likely to impact job and business growth over the planning period. For example, the Greater Fresno Region DRIVE plan (2019) proposes a 10-year vision for major changes to economic and workforce development systems in Fresno that have the potential to shape the city and county’s economy over the next 10 years and beyond. The plan calls for more than $4 billion in public, private, and philanthropic investment in economic, development, workforce development, affordable housing, and neighborhood reinvestment by 2030 (see Figure 12 below). If implemented, this Consolidated Plan FRESNO 116 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) vision would increase access to jobs, workforce development, and economic development opportunities for Fresno residents. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 117 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FIGURE 12: PROPOSED INVESTMENTS IN THE GREATER FRESNO REGION DRIVE PLAN (2019) Socioeconomic changes anticipated over the next several years are also likely to impact workforce needs and job growth opportunities in Fresno. Affordable housing, including housing near job centers, will be an increasingly important component to supporting workforce and business attraction and retention. Stakeholders interviewed as part of this planning process emphasized the need for affordable housing that is close to jobs, resources, and transportation, including a need for a variety of housing types and sizes. This housing is of particular need for seniors, people with disabilities, people transitioning from homelessness, and people living with HIV/AIDS. With increasing demand for housing in the city and region, affordable housing close to jobs, resources, and transportation is becoming more difficult to find, and low-income residents are often unable to access areas of higher opportunity or are displaced by rising housing costs. Rising housing costs are also a primary contributor to high levels of homelessness in the region. To that end, there is a growing need to devote resources to the development of affordable housing with access to jobs, services, and transportation. How do the skills and education of the current workforce correspond to employment opportunities in the jurisdiction? The city’s CEDS and the Greater Fresno Region DRIVE plan both identified the need for skilled labor and knowledge workers in Fresno. The City of Fresno Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (2015-2020) emphasizes the need for workforce enhancement and improving the availability of skills development and work-force training to address low skills in the workforce and low levels of educational attainment. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 118 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The Greater Fresno Region DRIVE plan (2019) describes weaknesses related to education and workforce readiness as including: • Adult Bachelor’s degree completion is almost 30% lower than the state average. These outcomes have implications for the labor market, where the supply of skilled workers often does not meet demand: For occupations that require a certificate or a postsecondary degree, there is a projected labor market gap of ~32,000 jobs by 2033. This gap is defined as the projected shortage of qualified graduates to fill open positions if current historical trends for postsecondary graduates and job openings continue to hold. • In addition to the labor market gap, Fresno faces a higher education capacity gap: Today, ~2,800 students that are eligible to join a 4-year institution are turned away due to the lack of capacity in the region. • For many un- or underemployed adults in Fresno, a lack of educational attainment is a major barrier to achieving more meaningful employment. • Once residents have access to training, they may not receive sufficient work-based learning (WBL) opportunities, resulting in credentials that do not provide employability skills. • Before children are even born, mothers and families of color are disproportionately at risk for adverse early childhood outcomes due to insufficient access to quality care. • Only 34 percent of Fresno children are kindergarten-ready at the time of enrollment. • Insufficient access to programs and services persists after birth and through early childhood, impacting healthy growth and development into adulthood. Describe any current workforce training initiatives, including those supported by Workforce Investment Boards, community colleges and other organizations. Describe how these efforts will support the jurisdiction's Consolidated Plan. The Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board funds education and training to ensure individuals have skills necessary to find jobs with family-sustaining wages and meet the workforce needs of regional employers. Workforce training initiatives include: • One-Stop Centers, in which adults and dislocated workers have access to education, training and employment services, as well as referrals (when deemed appropriate) to other services available through a network of partner agencies • Basic career services, including access to computers, fax and copy machines, telephones to contact employers, veterans’ services, labor market information, career exploration tools, and job listings • Individualized career services, including one-on-one work with an Employment Readiness Specialist to assist with career guidance, skill level evaluations, educational and training opportunities, and job readiness workshops • Access to occupational skills training and on-the-job training opportunities • Supportive services to assist with purchasing items necessary to secure a job, provide training supplies, interview clothing and transportation needs Consolidated Plan FRESNO 119 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Academic assistance, job readiness, mentoring, guidance, financial literacy training, and leadership development opportunities for youth, and • Business assistance, including accommodations for business meetings, presentations, trainings, one-on-one and/or group interviews, business workshops and trainings, connection to business consultants, funding to upskill existing employees, confidential human resource hotline, and recruitment assistance. The County of Fresno Department of Social Services (DSS) offers the following services to qualified employers for DSS clients hired: • Employee recruitment • Employee screening • Specialized employee training • Employee retention services, including support and engagement of clients, equipment, transportation and childcare • Wage subsidies up to a year depending on the needs of the DSS client Local colleges and universities, including California State University, Fresno; Fresno Pacific University; State Center Community College District; West Hills Community College District; Fresno City College; Fresno school districts, and other educational institutions provide a variety of types of education and training to increase the skills of the region’s workforce. The Fresno County Department of Behavioral Health provides Workforce Education and Training as a component of the Mental Health Services Act, intended to address identified occupational shortages and education and training needs of the public mental health workforce. Programs offered by the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board and other workforce development stakeholders closely align with workforce development needs identified in the Consolidated Plan, including job skills training and job search assistance. Does your jurisdiction participate in a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)? If so, what economic development initiatives are you undertaking that may be coordinated with the Consolidated Plan? If not, describe other local/regional plans or initiatives that impact economic growth. The City of Fresno participated in the City of Fresno Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, a plan prepared by the City of Fresno Economic Development Department. The strategy serves as the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) in accordance with the U.S. Economic Development Administration’s requirements, and as a guide for policies, programs, and investments to support economic development in the city. The CEDS identified operational economic development goals for the city, including: • Goal 1: Enhanced Infrastructure Improvement District o a. Complete the fiscal and economic analysis for the Enhanced Infrastructure Improvement District for the Fresno Industrial Triangle. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 120 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) o b. Conclude the engineering work to at least 30% for the Fresno Industrial Triangle public infrastructure. • Goal 2: Build, brand and market the Fresno Industrial Triangle (FIT) as a master planned industrial park of more than 500 acres. • Goal 3: Attract at least one major company distribution center with at least 200 plus employees to build in Fresno. • Goal 4: Receive approval from the Economic Development Administration for the South Van Ness Industrial area improvement application and begin the construction. • Goal 5: Attract the HSRA Heavy Maintenance Facility to Fresno. • Goal 6: Attract at least one Silicon Valley Company to open a major facility in Fresno. • Goal 7: Complete the annexation of 120 acres of land in the sphere of influence into the City for industrial purposes. • Goal 8: Conduct and complete the Brookings Institute GCI export strategic plan and Implement recommendations. • Goal 9: Establish a new and updated Economic Development Website. • Goal 10: Continue and Expand the Fresno business expansion and retention program. Activities the City anticipates undertaking over the next five years will support several of the strategies listed in the CEDS, including providing connections to workforce development programs. The City will continue efforts with the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board to provide job training and employment readiness education. MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion Are there areas where households with multiple housing problems are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration") HUD defines four types of housing problems: (1) cost burden of more than 30%, (2) more than 1 person per room, (3) lack of complete kitchen facilities, and (4) lack of complete plumbing facilities. The HUD-provided map of housing needs and race/ ethnicity in Fresno shows the share of households within each census tract that have least one of these housing problems. A concentration of households with housing needs is defined as a census tract where more than 40% of households have at least one housing need. Using this definition, there are 89 census tracts either totally or partially within the city limits with a concentration of housing problems. Census tracts without high percentages of housing problems can be found primarily north of E. Nees Avenue in northeast Fresno, and north of N. Santa Fe Avenue in northwest Fresno. Several other tracts with low percentages of housing problems can be found in the city, such as the census tracts immediately south of the City of Clovis, two tracts between Peach Avenue and S. Clovis Avenue in southeast Fresno, and a tract north of East McKinley Avenue between N. Fruit Avenue and N. Van Ness Blvd. Census tracts where more than 40% of households have a housing need are generally located in areas of the city that are predominantly populated by Hispanic residents. Although the population of the city is majority Hispanic, the map that follows shows patterns of Consolidated Plan FRESNO 121 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) disproportionate representation of Hispanic residents in census tracts with high percentages of housing problems. Are there any areas in the jurisdiction where racial or ethnic minorities or low- income families are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration") Geographic patterns for people of color residing in Fresno are shown in the maps of people of color by block group in Fresno. Concentration is defined as a census tract in which more than 50% of residents are people of color. Hispanic residents make up more than 50% of the population in many census tracts in central, west and southeast Fresno. Asian residents make up 50% of the population in one census block group in southeast Fresno, between S. Maple and S. Cedar Avenues, south of E Butler Avenue. Black and Native American residents do not make up more than 50% of any census tract in the city. In its fair housing planning guidance, HUD defines racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (RECAP) where more than one-half of the population are people of color and the individual poverty rate is over 40%. There are 40 RECAP census tracts in Fresno, most of which are located in central, southwest and southeast Fresno. Three RECAP tracts are located north of Shaw Avenue; tracts 54.08 and 54.03 include Fresno State University, and RECAP tract 45.05 is located along Highway 41 between Bullard and Shaw Avenues. What are the characteristics of the market in these areas/neighborhoods? RECAP census tracts in Fresno tend to have high percentages of renter tenure. Eighteen of the 40 RECAP tracts have renter rates greater than 74%. Despite a high percentage of renters in the city, the percentage of affordable housing units is very limited. The highest rates of affordable housing units can be found in central and southwest Fresno, where 40-50% of rental units in census tracts 1, 2, 3, and 8 are considered affordable to households earning 50% AMI. Census tract 9.02 in southwest Fresno and census tract 14.08 in southeast Fresno are composed of 67% and 71% affordable units respectively, as recorded in the HUD AFFH Tool. Are there any community assets in these areas/neighborhoods? The RECAP tracts in Fresno contain many of the city’s civic, cultural and educational resources. RECAP tracts in central Fresno, including census tracts 1, 2, 3, 5.02, 6, contain the Community Regional Medical Center, Fresno City Hall, the Fresno Superior Court, and the Fresno Convention and Entertainment Center. Census tracts 54.03 and 54.08 in north Fresno are home to California State University – Fresno and the Bulldog Stadium. Census tract 20 in west Fresno contains the Fresno Chaffee Zoo. Census tracts 34 and 35 hold Fresno City College, the Fresno Art Museum, and the Veteran Affairs Medical Center. Other RECAP tracts are home to many parks, schools and other local amenities for the community. Are there other strategic opportunities in any of these areas? Due to the number of RECAPs in the city, these areas benefit from many strategic opportunities based on location and existing resources. RECAPs located in central Fresno, particularly downtown, are adjacent to Highways 99, 41 and 180. The city’s Downtown Neighborhoods Consolidated Plan FRESNO 122 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Community Plan also note that a number of historic buildings in downtown can be rehabilitated for residential and commercial purposes. The city is also anticipating the construction of a high speed rail line that will run through central Fresno, providing 171 miles of commuter access through the San Joaquin Valley. HOUSING NEEDS AND RACE AND ETHNICITY BY CENSUS TRACT IN FRESNO Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 123 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) POPULATION BY BLOCK GROUP FOR PEOPLE OF COLOR IN FRESNO Data Source: HUD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 124 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing occupied by Low- and Moderate-Income Households - 91.210(a)(4), 91.310(a)(2) Describe the need for broadband wiring and connections for households, including low- and moderate-income households and neighborhoods. Broadband wiring and connectivity are critical needs for all households, particularly low- to moderate-income households, who use the internet for both personal and professional use. To that end, uninterrupted broadband service is provided throughout nearly all residential areas of Fresno. Wireline broadband service is offered by both Comcast and AT&T California. Wireless providers are numerous and include Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint, and AT&T Mobility. According to the California Interactive Broadband Map, those locations with access to residential wireline and wireless service typically receive download speeds greater than 10 Mbps and upload speeds greater than 1 Mbps. In the city’s 18 lowest-income census tracts, wireline and wireless broadband service is provided uniformly, and at high speeds. Tracts where wireline coverage are absent on the map tend to be the locations of non-residential uses such as the industrial area south of Highways 41 and 99, the Fresno Chaffee Zoo and Woodward Park in north Fresno. Maps indicate that there is inconsistent wireline and wireless coverage in downtown Fresno and in the area southeast of downtown to S. East Avenue. These areas also have commercial, civic and industrial use as primary land uses. However, there may be residential use present in the downtown area with limited wireless and wireline connectivity. In lieu of services, members of this community may need to utilize wireless services at local community anchor institutions, such as the Central Library. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 125 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Wireless Broadband Coverage in Fresno Data Source: http://www.broadbandmap.ca.gov/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 126 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Wireline Broadband Coverage in Fresno Data Source: http://www.broadbandmap.ca.gov/ Describe the need for increased competition by having more than one broadband Internet service provider serve the jurisdiction. The City of Fresno is largely served by two wireline providers, Comcast and AT&T California. The city is also served by at least four wireless providers: Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint and AT&T Mobility. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 127 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) MA-65 Hazard Mitigation - 91.210(a)(5), 91.310(a)(3) Describe the jurisdiction’s increased natural hazard risks associated with climate change. The impacts of environmental hazards on low- and moderate-income households is an important consideration for regional planners, city staff, and housing and service providers in the city of Fresno and Fresno County. From 2017 to 2018, Fresno County drafted an update to the Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. The plan identified hazards most likely to impact the county. The Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan notes that climate change may have dramatic impacts on the county’s ecosystems, including the following areas of high vulnerability: • Vulnerability to Drought (High) o Reduced snowpack, resulting in earlier snowmelt and reduced downstream water availability during summer and early fall. o Reduced capacity to address future drought and wildfire risk related to climate change due to projected temperature increases and shortages in water. o Greater variation and uncertainty regarding the availability of water supplies, which are already under tremendous stress. • Vulnerability to Wildfire (High) o Overall, warming will lead to increased heat wave intensity but decreased cold wave intensity. Future heat waves signify a potential increase in the wildfire hazard intensity and severity in Fresno County, as well as a year-long fire season. o Fresno County potentially has less capacity to address future wildfire risk related to climate change due to shortages in water, vital to combating wildfires. • Vulnerability to Agricultural Hazards (High) o Changes in weather patterns can have dramatic impacts on the ecosystem, including agriculture systems; more severe impacts can be expected into the future. • Vulnerability to Flood/Levee Failure (High) o Potential for increased flooding because higher temperatures result in increased water vapor to form precipitation. • Vulnerability to Dam Failure (High) o The potential for climate change to affect the likelihood of dam failure is not fully understood at this point in time. More extreme precipitation events as a result of climate change could result in large inflows to reservoirs. However, this could be offset by generally lower reservoir levels if storage water resources become more limited or stretched in the future due to climate change, drought and/or population growth. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 128 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) To mitigate environmental hazards in the county, the plan identifies a variety of techniques focused on protection, prevention, emergency services, coordination, and public education and awareness. Describe the vulnerability to these risks of housing occupied by low- and moderate-income households based on an analysis of data, findings, and methods. The degree to which low- and moderate-income households are vulnerable to increased natural hazards associated with climate change is an important consideration for jurisdictions and regions as they prepare environmental resiliency and other plans. The Fourth National Climate Assessment (2018) notes that vulnerable populations, including lower-income and other marginalized communities, have lower capacity to prepare for and cope with extreme weather and climate-related events. Because these communities are expected to experience greater impacts, it is important that jurisdictions prioritize adaptation actions for the most vulnerable populations.20 The Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan further notes that Fresno County has higher levels of social vulnerability to hazards because of the high proportion of low-income households and households below the poverty level. American Community Survey data for 2013-2017 indicate that: • Median household income for residents of the city of Fresno is $44,853; • An estimated 49,036 (29.7 percent) of the city’s 165,067 households have incomes of less than $25,000 per year; and • 28.4 percent of Fresno residents were living below the poverty level in the past 12 months. In this way, a large proportion of the city’s residents have reduced capacity to prepare for and cope with extreme weather and climate-related events. 20 U.S. Global Change Research Program. (2018). Fourth National Climate Assessment. Retrieved from: https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/ Consolidated Plan FRESNO 129 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) STRATEGIC PLAN SP-05 Overview Strategic Plan Overview This Strategic Plan describes the City’s priorities for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships Act (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) funding, including how those resources will be allocated geographically, how the specific projects funded by the City will address these priorities, and the outcomes that can be expected as a result. The priorities represent the highest level needs expected to be addressed over the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan period using the City’s CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funds. In summary, the priority needs are: • Provide assistance for the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless through safe low-barrier shelter options, housing first collaborations, and associated supportive services. • Improve access to affordable housing for low‐income and special needs households by partnering with interested developers to increase development of low-income and affordable housing in high opportunity areas, and by promoting the preservation and rehabilitation of existing affordable housing units. • Promote quality of life and neighborhood revitalization through improvements to current public infrastructure and facilities, and by closing gaps in areas with aging, lower quality, or nonexistent public infrastructure and facilities. • Provide services to low‐income and special needs households that develop human capital and improve quality of life. • Provide services to residents and housing providers to advance fair housing. • Plan and administer funding for community development, housing, and homelessness activities with improved transparency, increased community involvement, and full compliance with federal regulations. The City of Fresno’s Consolidated Plan preparation coincides with the development of the first year Action Plan process. The City awards CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funding to non‐ profits, public agencies, City departments, and developers that provide public services and housing for low-income and special needs households. It is largely through these partners that the City is able to accomplish progress toward its priority needs. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 130 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-10 Geographic Priorities – 91.215 (a)(1) Geographic Area Not applicable. The City has not established specific target areas to focus the investment of entitlement funds. TABLE 48 - GEOGRAPHIC PRIORITY AREAS Area Name Area Type General Allocation Priorities Describe the basis for allocating investments geographically within the jurisdiction (or within the EMSA for HOPWA) The Consolidated Plan generally allocates CDBG, HOME, and ESG dollars according to low‐ and moderate‐income (LMI) census tracts without specification of target areas. The City’s LMI areas include much of south Fresno as well as neighborhoods such as El Dorado Park, Herndon Town, Highway City, Manchester, and Pinedale. HUD generally awards HOPWA funds on a regional basis to the largest city within a HOPWA- eligible region. Fresno therefore receives and administers HOPWA funding for the entirety of Fresno County, known as its “Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area” or EMSA. The City is required to serve eligible persons living anywhere within the EMSA and not just within City limits. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 131 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-25 Priority Needs - 91.215(a)(2) Priority Needs Based on the Needs Assessment, Market Analysis, and community outreach conducted for this Consolidated Plan, the City has set the priority needs described below. To be considered for funding through the City’s CDBG, HOME, ESG, or HOPWA allocations, projects must address one or more of these priority needs. TABLE 49 – PRIORITY NEEDS SUMMARY 1 Priority need Homelessness Priority level High Population(s) served Chronic homelessness Individuals Families with children Mentally ill Chronic substance abuse Veterans Persons with HIV/AIDS Victims of domestic violence Unaccompanied youth Geographic area(s) affected Citywide Associated goal(s) Homelessness Description • Funding for short-term direct assistance in the form of rent and utility payments to prevent households from becoming homeless • Transitional housing options that include supportive services and case management as an intermediate step between emergency shelter and private market housing • Additional shelter space, particularly for intact families and LGBTQ individuals; expansion of capacity for existing low-barrier shelters • Additional and/or improved shelter space for domestic violence victims • Support the use of Housing First and Rapid Re-Housing approaches to homelessness • Outreach to the homeless community to engage and inform people of available services • Permanent housing options for very low-income individuals that can be maintained long term as part of the city’s affordable housing supply Consolidated Plan FRESNO 132 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Priority Need Homelessness (Continued) Basis for priority The 500 respondents to the Fresno Housing and Community Needs Survey ranked the City’s homelessness needs above all other types of needs surveyed, with homeless prevention standing out as the highest-ranked among all the homelessness needs. Survey-takers’ passion for this issue is further underscored by the open-ended comments some included such as: “We just need to do everything we can”, “MOST IMPORTANT!!!”, “Housing First!”, and “This has to be the number one priority for our city.” Additionally, public meeting participants frequently discussed needs related to homelessness. These included needs for more low-barrier shelter space, case management for people experiencing homelessness, job and skills training, drug/alcohol counseling, and shelters for LGBTQ people that are not coupled to requirements for religious participation. 2 Priority need Affordable Housing Priority level High Population(s) served Extremely low income Low income Moderate income Large family Families with children Elderly Public housing residents People with disabilities Geographic area(s) affected Citywide Associated goal(s) Affordable Housing Description • New construction of affordable rental housing units, focusing on infill opportunities with good access to existing public infrastructure • Voucher-based rental assistance (i.e. TBRA) to assist low-income households with the cost of existing rental units in the city • Preservation of the city’s existing affordable housing supply through rehabilitation and repair programs, both for homeowner and rental housing, and to specifically include elderly residents and mobile homes • Programming to assist people with disabilities with the cost of accessibility modifications • Closing cost and down payment assistance to help first-time homebuyers achieve homeownership, including for residents purchasing under an Individual Tax ID Number • Provision of safe, sanitary, and low-barrier housing for people living with HIV/AIDS through voucher- based programs; short-term rent, mortgage, and utility assistance; and permanent supportive housing • Home improvement programming that assists homeowners with the cost of improvements that will improve the energy efficiency of their homes Consolidated Plan FRESNO 133 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Priority Need Affordable Housing (Continued) Basis for priority More than one in three Fresno households (36%) is cost burdened, spending more than 30% of its income on housing expenses; nearly a quarter of the city’s households (22%) spend more than 50%. Cost burdening is particularly pervasive among renters, who make up more 75% of the city’s cost burdened households. Compounding the housing affordability issue is the fact that housing prices have increased far more steeply than household income, meaning that a housing supply that meets all of Fresno’s affordability needs today will be insufficient to do so in the future. Public meeting participants and stakeholders interviewed as part of the development of the Consolidated Plan identified a wide variety of needs related to housing affordability in Fresno. For many, the issue was primarily related to expanding the supply and improving the quality of rental housing. Other needs identified in public meeting breakout groups and ranked highly by survey respondents included energy efficiency improvements, rental assistance, homebuyer assistance, and housing for specific subpopulations (large families, seniors, people with disabilities). 3 Priority need Public Infrastructure and City-Owned Facilities Priority level High Population(s) served Extremely low income Low income Moderate income People with physical disabilities Non-housing community development Geographic area(s) affected Citywide Associated goal(s) Public Infrastructure and Facilities Description • Improvements to streets, curbs, sidewalks, and street lighting, particularly in south Fresno neighborhoods • Renovation and improvement of existing recreation centers, senior centers, and similar facilities • Improved amenities within existing public parks, such as playground equipment and athletic facilities, particularly in south Fresno neighborhoods • Development of youth-oriented recreation facilities • Acquisition of additional park space in south Fresno Basis for priority Public Infrastructure: Other than homelessness-related needs, street, road, and sidewalk improvements were ranked more highly than any other needs queried in the public survey. Public Facilities: In public meetings and through the Community Need Scorecard exercise, meeting participants tended to rank parks, gymnasiums, outdoor recreation space, and youth centers among the highest priorities. The priority is also supported by survey results, where these types of city-owned facilities were given priority just behind street, road, and sidewalk improvements. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 134 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 4 Priority need Community Services Priority level High Population(s) served Extremely low income Low income Moderate income Large families Families with children Elderly / frail elderly People with disabilities Geographic area(s) affected Citywide Associated goal(s) Community Services Description • Counseling and recovery programs for people with alcohol and/or substance abuse disorders • Services to assist the victims of domestic violence • Services to assist children who have been victims of abuse • Afterschool enrichment programs for children to include educational and recreational programming • Enhanced programming for children and youth in existing parks and recreation centers • Affordable childcare and daycare options, particularly for parents engaged in the workforce or who are enrolled in job training programs • Job training to include assistance with job search and interview skills • Educational activities for adults around job skills and employment to improve employment options • Offer incentive programs for entrepreneurs and local businesses that create new jobs • Recreation, nutrition, and social services for seniors Basis for priority Stakeholders and public meeting participants, including groups of seniors and teens, were instrumental in identifying these high-priority community services needs. The Community Need Scorecard exercise used in public meeting settings generally shows these types of needs as lower priority than those related to homelessness and affordable housing, yet many of the activity types included in the description of this priority were nonetheless ranked highly by survey respondents. The top five public services needs ranked by survey respondents included drug abuse and crime prevention, child abuse prevention, afterschool services, employment training, and neighborhood deterioration. These needs were frequently named in public meeting settings as well. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 135 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 5 Priority need Promote Fair Housing Priority level High Population(s) served Extremely low income Low income Moderate income Middle income People with disabilities Victims of domestic violence Geographic area(s) affected Citywide Associated goal(s) Fair Housing Description • Fair housing education services to help residents, community organizations, and housing providers understand fair housing rights and responsibilities • Legal assistance in the prevention of eviction Basis for priority Survey responses reveal a gap in the community’s understanding of fair housing and a need for greater education and enforcement around this subject. While 64% of respondents reported knowing their fair housing rights, fewer than half (45%) knew where to file a complaint of housing discrimination. Further, 20% of respondents (91 individuals) said they had experienced some form of housing discrimination since living in Fresno, with more than four in five of those instances going unreported. Stakeholder interviews further support this priority and particularly indicate wrongful evictions as a fair housing issue to be addressed. 6 Priority need Programmatic Compliance Priority level High Population(s) served All Geographic area(s) affected Citywide Associated goal(s) Programmatic Compliance Description • Program administration and compliance costs related to the planning and execution of community development, housing, and homelessness activities assisted with funds provided under the CDBG, HOME, and ESG, and HOPWA programs. Basis for priority These are necessary administrative costs associated with ensuring effective coordination and delivery of services to Fresno residents. The City of Fresno is committed to ensuring compliance with federal regulations. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 136 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions – 91.215 (b) Influence of Market Conditions TABLE 50 – INFLUENCE OF MARKET CONDITIONS Affordable Housing Type Market Characteristics that will influence the use of funds available for housing type Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) High level of cost burdens among low-income households; waiting lists for assisted housing units; and need for short-term rental assistance for homeless individuals and families transitioning to permanent housing. Currently, TBRA is provided through HUD’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program administered through local housing authorities, with almost 13,000 vouchers in use within the City of Fresno. The City intends to use CDBG or HOME funds for TBRA over the next five years. TBRA for Non-Homeless Special Needs High level of cost burdens among low-income households, including non-homeless special needs populations; waiting lists for assisted housing units for seniors and people with disabilities. The City anticipates using HUD grant funds for TBRA over the next five years. New Unit Production Age and condition of housing; waiting lists at existing assisted housing developments; high occupancy rates and rental rates; sales prices unaffordable to low/moderate income households. The City intends to use HUD grant funding to support new affordable housing development over the next five years. Rehabilitation Age and condition of housing; issues related to substandard housing, especially for low-income renters; need for home repairs for seniors and other homeowners, including lead-based paint remediation. The City intends to use HUD grant funding to support rehabilitation of affordable homeowner and rental housing over the next five years. Acquisition, including preservation Subsidized housing developments anticipated to age out of their affordability period; age, condition, and availability of multifamily properties suitable for acquisition/rehabilitation; vacant/hazardous buildings identified through code enforcement. The City may use HUD grant funds for acquisition and/or preservation of affordable housing over the next five years. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 137 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-35 Anticipated Resources - 91.215(a)(4), 91.220(c)(1,2) Introduction Table 51 shows the City’s anticipated grant funding for the 2020 program year, along with an estimate of anticipated grant funding for the remaining years covered by this Consolidated Plan. The estimates for CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA assume level funding over the five years of the Consolidated Plan period at 100% of the 2019 allocation amounts. Anticipated Resources TABLE 51 - ANTICIPATED RESOURCES Program Source of Funds Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount Available Remainder of ConPlan $ Narrative Description Annual Allocation: $ Program Income: $ Prior Year Resources: $ Total: $ CDBG Public - Federal • Housing Rehabilitation • Senior Paint Program • Economic Development • Housing • Street and Sidewalk Improvements • Public Services • Nonprofit facilities • Park Improvements • Programmatic Compliance • Fair Housing Education and Assistance $7,112,639 $125,000 $12,679 $7,250,318 $28,950,556 Anticipated funding will include Entitlement grant funds, program income, and prior year resources. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 138 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Program Source Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Narrative HOME Public - Federal • Affordable Housing Development or Rehabilitation • CHDO Set Aside • Tenant-Based Rental Assistance • HOME Program Administration $3,255,075 $205,000 $0 $3,460,075 $13,840,299 Anticipated funding will include Entitlement grant funds and program income. ESG Public - Federal • Homeless Management Info System • Homeless Prevention • Outreach/ Emergency Shelter • Rapid Rehousing • Homeless Programs Administration $610,018 N/A $63,212 $673,230 $2,440,072 Anticipated funding will include Entitlement grant funds and prior year resources. HOPWA Public - Federal • STRMU • Short Term or Transitional Housing Facilities • TBRA $636,124 N/A $0 $636,124 $2,544,496 Anticipated funding consists of Entitlement grant funds. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 139 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied Leverage, in the context of entitlement funding, means bringing in other local, state, federal, and private-sector financial resources to maximize the reach and impact of the City’s HUD funded programs. Like many other federal agencies, HUD encourages its grant recipients to strategically leverage additional funds in order to achieve greater results. Leverage is also a way to increase project efficiencies and benefit from economies of scale that often come with combining sources of funding for similar or expanded scopes. In addition to the entitlement dollars listed in Table 51, the federal government has several other funding programs for community development and affordable housing activities. These include: Fair Housing Initiatives Program; Lead Based Paint; Choice Neighborhoods; the Supportive Housing Program; Section 202, Section 811; Youthbuild; the Housing Choice Voucher Program; the Affordable Housing Program (AHP) through the Federal Home Loan Bank, and others. It should be noted that in most cases the City would not be the applicant for these funding sources as many of these programs offer assistance to affordable housing developers and nonprofits rather than local jurisdictions. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 140 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) In California, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) administer a variety of statewide public affordable housing programs that offer assistance to nonprofit affordable housing developers. Examples of HCD’s programs include the Multifamily Housing Program (MHP), Affordable Housing Innovation Fund (AHIF), Building Equity and Growth in Neighborhoods Program (BEGIN), and CalHOME. Many HCD programs have historically been funded by one‐time State bond issuances and, as such, are subject to limited availability of funding. CalHFA offers multiple mortgage loan programs, down payment assistance programs, and funding for the construction, acquisition, and rehabilitation of affordable ownership units. The National Housing Trust Fund (HTF) is a new affordable housing production program that will complement existing federal, state and local efforts to increase and preserve the supply of decent, safe, and sanitary affordable housing for extremely low‐ and very low‐income households, including homeless families.21 States and state‐designated entities are eligible grantees for the HTF. HUD will allocate HTF funds by formula annually. A state must use at least 80 percent of each annual grant for rental housing; up to 10 percent for homeownership; and up to 10 percent for the grantee's reasonable administrative and planning costs. The State also administers the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits program, a widely used financing source for affordable housing projects. As with the other federal grant programs discussed above, the City of Fresno would not apply for these funding sources. Rather, local affordable housing developers could apply for funding through these programs for particular developments in the City. Over the Consolidated Plan cycle, there are several specific sources of additional funding, particularly related to homelessness, already identified and planned for use within the greater Fresno community. These sources include: • HUD funding to the Fresno-Madera Continuum of Care estimated at $10.7 million per year based on 2018 figures (estimate is based on 46% of the CoC’s total award representing the City’s share of the Fresno and Madera County populations); • CalHome funding of $2 million for mobile home rehabilitation; • Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention Program (HHAPP) funding through a one-time state bond issue ($6.15 million for the City of Fresno and $2.95 million for the Fresno-Madera CoC). As a recipient of HOME and ESG funding, the City is required to generate matching funds. For the HOME Program, the City is required to match twenty-five percent of all project expenditures. In recent years, and for PY 2020, HUD has waived the City’s HOME match requirement based on fiscal distress criteria. In PY 2020, the City will continue to seek HOME match funds to contribute to future year match liabilities. Examples of matching funds under the HOME Program include private financing and interest subsidies from homebuyer and residential rehabilitation programs. ESG requires a 100% match of program funds. The City passes this matching requirement on to the service providers receiving ESG funds. ESG providers meet this requirement through the 21 HUD Exchange. “Housing Trust Fund.” https://www.hudexchange.info/htf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 141 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) use of private donations, state grants, and/or volunteer hours. The City may also provide general funds to service providers in order to meet match requirements. If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan In accordance with AB 1486, the City provides a notice of availability for surplus properties to be posted on the California Housing and Community Development (HCD) website, and gives priority consideration to the development of affordable housing. Notices have been provided for two properties to date that may be consistent with the objectives in this strategic plan. The City will continue to assess its inventory of publically-owned land for opportunities to meet the strategic needs of this plan, as well as offering notices of availability in advance of any disposition of City-owned property, placing particular emphasis on potential sites of affordable housing in areas of high opportunity. APN Acre Address Zip Vacant Zoning 45603034T 4.17 5471 E BELMONT AVE 93727 Y RM-1 46704023ST 0.54 741 H STREET 93721 Y DTC Additionally, the below land is noted as vacant on the City’s current inventory and will be assessed for inclusion in future notices and development opportunities. . APN GISAcres ADDRESS ZIP Vacant Zone 47005203T 0.26 3745 E EL MONTE WAY 93702 Y RS-5 46015427T 0.24 MAPLE/JACKSON 93702 Y NMX+RS-5 49408103T 0.19 4826 E SHIELDS AVE 93703 Y RS-4 49408104T 0.19 4832 E SHIELDS AVE 93703 Y RS-4 49408105T 0.19 4838 E SHIELDS AVE 93703 Y RS-4 49408106T 0.19 4844 E SHIELDS AVE 93703 Y RS-4 49408107T 0.19 4850 E SHIELDS AVE 93703 Y RS-4 49408108T 0.19 4856 E SHIELDS AVE 93703 Y RS-4 49408109T 0.19 4862 E SHIELDS AVE 93703 Y RS-4 49408110T 0.19 4868 E SHIELDS AVE 93703 Y RS-4 49408111T 0.19 4874 E SHIELDS AVE 93703 Y RS-4 49408112T 0.19 4880 E SHIELDS AVE 93703 Y RS-4 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 142 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) APN GISAcres ADDRESS ZIP Vacant Zone 44405116T 0.12 2252 N FRUIT AVE 93705 Y RS-5 44404117T 0.37 720 W VASSAR AVE 93705 Y RS-5 46431211T 0.23 1122 S ROEDING DR 93706 Y RS-4 46718609T 0.34 1128 COLLINS AVE 93706 Y RS-5 46431212T 0.24 1136 S ROEDING DR 93706 Y RS-4 46431213T 0.46 1150 S WEST AVE 93706 Y RS-4 46431214T 0.39 1164 S WEST AVE 93706 Y RS-4 46427237T 1.05 1212 S WEST AVE 93706 Y RS-4 46411313T 0.14 130 W LEMON AVE 93706 Y RS-5 47706004T 7.71 146 E FLORENCE AVE 93706 Y RS-3 47714544T 0.19 29 E FLORENCE AVE 93706 Y RS-5 47720051T 0.14 E BYRD AVE 93706 Y RS-5 47714531T 0.40 84 E GEARY ST 93706 Y RS-5 50733022ST 0.27 4069 W KADOTA AVE 93722 Y RM-1 50601014T 6.95 W HERNDON AND N VETERANS 93722 Y RM-2 51135201ST 0.26 5986 W DAYTON AVE 93722 Y RS-4 48111042T 10.24 E BYRD AND S WILLOW 93725 Y RS-5 48130033ST 5.68 E CHURCH AVE AND S ORANGEWOOD DR 93725 Y RS-4 48102030T 21.90 2155 S PEACH AVE 93725 Y RS-1 48102029T 7.22 S PEACH AVE AND E GEARY ST 93725 Y RS-1 48111053T 0.88 E GARRETT AVE AND S WILLOW AVE 93725 Y RS-3 31332107T 0.46 N ARGYLE AND E TULARE AVE 93727 Y RS-4 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 143 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) APN GISAcres ADDRESS ZIP Vacant Zone 45021106T 0.21 929 N FRUIT 93728 Y RS-5 The City maintains a list of vacant city-owned real estate parcels that could potentially be used for opportunities arising in connection with needs identified in this plan. The current list consists of 176 parcels. Of those, 150 (approximately 204 total acres) are located south of Shields Avenue and 7 (totaling 18 acres) are within what the City terms “High Opportunity Areas”. City staff are currently assessing the list of vacant parcels against the priorities and objectives of the draft strategic plan and will provide additional information on anticipated use of any of these city- owned properties in the final report. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 144 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure – 91.215(k) Explain the institutional structure through which the jurisdiction will carry out its consolidated plan including private industry, non-profit organizations, and public institutions. Agencies through which the City of Fresno will carry out its consolidated plan are shown in Table 52. In addition to those listed in the table, the City will also rely on a variety of non-profit and private sector housing developers, including Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs), Low Income Housing Tax Credit developers, and others. As of the last program year, the City has three organizations certified as CHDOs, including Community Housing Assistance Program, Self-Help Enterprises, and Visionary Homebuilders of California.22 TABLE 52 - INSTITUTIONAL DELIVERY STRUCTURE Responsible Entity Responsible Entity Type Role Geographic Area Served City of Fresno Government • Economic Development • Homelessness • Non-Homeless Special Needs • Ownership • Rental • Planning • Neighborhood Improvements • Public Facilities • Public Services Jurisdiction Fresno Housing Authority PHA • Public Housing • Ownership • Rental County Fresno Madera Continuum of Care Continuum of Care • Homelessness • Public Services Region Fair Housing Council of Central California Non-profit Organization • Public Services Jurisdiction Fresno County Department of Public Health Government • Health • Public Services • Homelessness • HIV/AIDS County Habitat for Humanity Greater Fresno Area Non-profit Organizations • Ownership Jurisdiction Fresno County Department of Social Services Government • Public Services Jurisdiction Fresno Regional Workforce Development Government • Economic Development • Workforce Development Region 22 State of California Department of Housing and Community Development. (2019). Community Housing Development Organization Certification List. Retrieved from: https://www.hcd.ca.gov/grants- funding/active-funding/docs/CHDO-Cert-List-Nov-2019-F.pdf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 145 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Responsible Entity Responsible Entity Type Role Geographic Area Served Board Fresno County Department of Behavioral Health Government • Mental Health Services • Homelessness County Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission Nonprofit • Economic Development • Workforce Development • Education • Public Services • Housing • Health County Fresno County Economic Development Corporation Government • Economic Development County Fresno Unified School District Government • Education K-12 • Homeless Liaison Jurisdiction Homeless Service Providers (Poverello House, West Care, Fresno Rescue Mission, etc.) Nonprofit • Homelessness • Public Services • Workforce Development Jurisdiction Assessment of Strengths and Gaps in the Institutional Delivery System Based on information included in Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018), strengths of the institutional delivery system include: • Tremendous enthusiasm was expressed about the Multi‑Agency Access Program (MAP) Point’s ability to assess, link, and connect individuals and families to community resources. • FMCoC Coordinated Entry System (CES) provides assessment, triage, and linkage to available permanent and transitional housing resources dedicated to serving homeless families and individuals.23 Based on information in Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018), gaps of the institutional delivery system include: • There is a need to develop a collective impact initiative of influential community leaders who can deploy human or financial resources and keep track of the big picture, including representatives from philanthropy, business, the faith community, affordable housing and homelessness experts, and human services experts. 23 Fresno Housing Authority and City of Fresno. (2018). Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action. Retrieved from: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5bce427bab1a620db3827b91/t/5bcf93320d929728e94bafff/15403 30305802/Street2HomeReport_v8.pdf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 146 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • There is a need to use the impact initiative to engage the entire community in homelessness issues, including partners, elected officials, community leaders, and the public. • There is a need to strengthen data analysis to expand on the FMCoC’s Homelessness Management Information System (HMIS) and the annual Point‑In‑Time (PIT) Count. • There is a need to implement strategies to enhance the Multi-Agency Access Program and Coordinate Entry System to utilize diversion and to ensure the households with the longest histories of homelessness and the greatest vulnerability receive these scarce resources.24 Availability of services targeted to homeless persons and persons with HIV and mainstream services TABLE 53 - HOMELESS PREVENTION SERVICES SUMMARY Homelessness Prevention Services Available in the Community Targeted to Homeless Targeted to People with HIV Homelessness Prevention Services Counseling/Advocacy X X X Legal Assistance X X X Mortgage Assistance X X X Rental Assistance X X X Utilities Assistance X X X Street Outreach Services Law Enforcement X X Mobile Clinics X X X Other Street Outreach Services X X Supportive Services Alcohol & Drug Abuse X X Child Care X X Education X X X Employment and Employment Training X X Healthcare X X X HIV/AIDS X X X Life Skills X X X Mental Health Counseling X X X Transportation X X Other Other 24 Ibid. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 147 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe how the service delivery system (including, but not limited to, the services listed above) meets the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) The City of Fresno partners with the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care and a variety of agencies and organizations to provide services to the homeless. The City of Fresno uses ESG funds for outreach, rapid rehousing, emergency shelter, homelessness prevention, and data collection and analysis. Housing providers and street outreach workers seek to provide outreach and service navigation to persons experiencing homelessness. As described in Section MA-30, housing providers in the city work closely with the Fresno County Department of Behavioral Health and nonprofit organizations to provide mental health services and case management. The City will also continue to provide information and training to service providers on how their staff can assist clients in accessing mainstream benefits. The Fresno Madera Continuum of Care uses a coordinated entry process and the Multi-Agency Action Program (MAP) to standardize the access, assessment, prioritization, and referral procedure for all people across all participating providers. The coordinated entry process includes assessment, navigation and case conferencing, housing referral with choice, and data collection and communication. The system uses a vulnerability index to prioritize the most at- risk individuals. This approach means that individuals and families who are experiencing homelessness or at-risk of homelessness are identified early, screened, and connected with the most appropriate intervention or best match possible that addresses their immediate needs. Describe the strengths and gaps of the service delivery system for special needs population and persons experiencing homelessness, including, but not limited to, the services listed above The City of Fresno works with its partners in the community to collaborate on projects to ensure that individuals and families who are chronically homeless are housed and provided necessary supportive services. The collaborating agencies will coordinate funding and resources to make additional permanent housing beds available for the chronically homeless community. Efforts include increasing outreach to chronically homeless individuals and families, increasing homelessness prevention, increasing permanent supportive housing, and streamlining the assessment and referral process. Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) identifies the following strengths in the service delivery system: • Since 2011 Fresno has made progress with a 60 percent overall reduction in homelessness. • While overall homelessness and unsheltered homelessness is up in 2018 compared to 2017, chronic homelessness is down significantly. The decrease is attributed to intentional strategic and investment decisions to increase the amount of permanent Consolidated Plan FRESNO 148 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) supportive housing and target this resource to this vulnerable and expensive population.25 The primary gaps in the service delivery system for special needs populations are the lack of funding needed to create additional beds and services. There is also a gap in services delivery for difficult-to-place special needs clients. The lack of long-term affordable rental housing in the city and county presents another gap in the service delivery system. Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) identifies the following gaps in the service delivery system: • While chronic homelessness is down considerably, homelessness overall is trending slightly upwards. • The rise of unsheltered homelessness is likely due to the rising cost of rent and the severe lack of affordable rental housing in Fresno County. • Once a person becomes homeless, the housing resources to help them exit homelessness are also very scarce. Current permanent housing options available through the Fresno-Madera Continuum of Care, permanent supportive housing (PSH), and rapid re-housing (RRH) are at capacity. • Chronic homelessness is projected to rise if no additional permanent supportive housing is added. • There is a need to preserve existing affordable housing. • There is a need to align community programs to create a comprehensive crisis response network that provides person‑centered and housing‑focused service. There is particularly a shortage of residential programs that offer safe temporary shelter and services; generally emergency shelter is highly specialized to a narrowly defined population or program model such that for most single adults there is effectively no access to emergency shelter. • There is a need to create new low‑barrier crisis housing options. • There is a need to enhance housing placement options and supports. • There is a need to scale up rapid re‑housing. • There is a need to increase permanent supportive housing. • There is a need to aggressively expand non‑traditional permanent housing options. • There is a need to design and fund a cross‑sector demonstration for people who experience street homelessness and are frequent users.26 25 Fresno Housing Authority and City of Fresno. (2018). Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action. Retrieved from: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5bce427bab1a620db3827b91/t/5bcf93320d929728e94bafff/15403 30305802/Street2HomeReport_v8.pdf 26 Fresno Housing Authority and City of Fresno. (2018). Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action. Retrieved from: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5bce427bab1a620db3827b91/t/5bcf93320d929728e94bafff/15403 30305802/Street2HomeReport_v8.pdf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 149 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Provide a summary of the strategy for overcoming gaps in the institutional structure and service delivery system for carrying out a strategy to address priority needs The City of Fresno will take the following steps to overcome gaps in the institutional delivery structure and service delivery system for persons experiencing homelessness and other special needs populations: • The City will allocate funding for homelessness prevention, outreach/ emergency shelter, Rapid Rehousing, and Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/ AIDS. • The City will continue to fund housing rehabilitation and affordable housing development. • The City will continue to provide funding to Community Housing Development Organizations to support the production of affordable housing in Fresno. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 150 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-45 Goals Summary – 91.215(a)(4) Goals Summary Information TABLE 54 – GOALS SUMMARY Sort Order Goal Name Start Year End Year Category Geographic Area Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator 1 Homelessness and the Prevention of Homelessness 2020 2024 Homeless N/A Homelessness ESG: $2,884,546638 HOPWA: $3,085,201 • Tenant-Based Rental Assistance/Rapid Rehousing: 900 households assisted • Homeless Person Overnight Shelter: 2,500 persons assisted • Public service activities for low/moderate-income housing benefit: 180 persons assisted 2 Safe and Affordable Housing 2020 2024 Affordable Housing N/A Affordable Housing CDBG: $6,911,383 HOME: $15,570,337 • Rental Units Constructed / Rehabilitated: 130 household housing units • Homeowner Housing Added / Rehabilitated: 270 household housing units 3 Public Infrastructure and Facilities 2020 2024 Non‐Housing Community Development Non‐ Homeless Special Needs N/A Public Infrastructure and City- Owned Facilities CDBG: $13,850,574 • Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 50,000 persons assisted 4 Community Services 2020 2024 Non‐Housing Community Development Non‐ Homeless Special Needs N/A Community Services CDBG: $5,509,500 • Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 11,300 persons assisted • Micro-enterprise assistance: 200 persons assisted Consolidated Plan FRESNO 151 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Goal Name Start Year End Year Category Geographic Area Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator 5 Fair Housing 2020 2024 Other: Fair Housing N/A Promote Fair Housing CDBG: $250,000 • N/A 6 Compliance 2020 2024 Other: Administration N/A Programmatic Compliance CDBG: $6,987,640 HOME: $1,730,038 ESG: $228,756664 HOPWA: $95,419 • Full compliance with adopted Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans, Citizen Participation Plans, and all other applicable regulations (Federal, State, Local, and HUD)N/A 7 Section 108 Loan Repayment 2020 2024 Other: Section 108 Loan Repayment N/A N/A CDBG: $2,502,027 • Construction of a Community Center Consolidated Plan FRESNO 152 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Goal Descriptions Goal 1: Homelessness and the Prevention of Homelessness Provide assistance for the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless through safe low- barrier shelter options, housing first collaborations, and associated supportive services. Goal 2: Safe and Affordable Housing Improve access to affordable housing for low‐income and special needs households by partnering with interested developers to increase development of low-income and affordable housing in high opportunity areas, and by promoting the preservation and rehabilitation of existing affordable housing units. Goal 3: Public Infrastructure and Facilities Promote quality of life and neighborhood revitalization through improvements to current public infrastructure and facilities, and by closing gaps in areas with aging, lower quality, or nonexistent public infrastructure and facilities. Goal 4: Community Services Provide services to low‐income and special needs households that develop human capital and improve quality of life. Goal 5: Fair Housing Provide services to residents and housing providers to advance fair housing. Goal 6: Compliance Plan and administer funding for community development, housing, and homelessness activities with improved transparency, increased community involvement, and full compliance with federal regulations. Estimate the number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income families to whom the jurisdiction will provide affordable housing as defined by HOME 91.315(b)(2) Using HOME, CDBG, and HOPWA funding sources, the City of Fresno will provide affordable housing to extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income households through: • The development of 130 HOME-assisted housing units, • Assistance to 900 households in accessing affordable housing through tenant-based rental assistance, and • Housing rehabilitation assistance to 220 households. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 153 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement – 91.215(c) Need to Increase the Number of Accessible Units (if Required by a Section 504 Voluntary Compliance Agreement) For affordable housing developments, the requirement is that 5% of the total development units are to be accessible units. Activities to Increase Resident Involvements The FH offers a number of activities for residents to increase their involvement in management and set them on the path to homeownership. As identified in its 2020 Annual PHA Plan, the FH conducts a financial literacy course through its Faith and Finance Program. The housing authority has also partnered with Self Help Enterprises to create a homeownership class and financial literacy workshop for residents with higher incomes. FH partners with Habitat for Humanity to help residents achieve homeownership. Is the public housing agency designated as troubled under 24 CFR part 902? The FH is designated a “Standard Performer” based on its 2012 score report in the Public Housing Assessment System, with a score of 84 on a 100-point scale. Plan to remove the ‘troubled’ designation Not applicable – the Fresno Housing Authority is not designated as “troubled.” SP-55 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.215(h) Barriers to Affordable Housing In the 2019 report, “Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates,” several researchers writing on behalf of the grassroots organization Faith in the Valley found that evictions were an important factor in overall housing instability. Eviction records also posed a major barrier for many residents seeking to obtain housing, particularly quality affordable housing. The report found that most evictions occurred for various reason, primarily due to late rent. Renters who were one month late with rent or owed one month’s rent plus fees made up 72% of all rent-related evictions. Another 11% of rent-related evictions occurred due to the tenant owing less than one-month’s rent. Other reasons for evictions included domestic disturbances, housing tenants who were not on the lease, owning unauthorized pets, marijuana or other substance use, or without any reason given. Fees associated with court and other potential costs tended to exacerbate the financial hardship for tenants, making the process of finding new housing even more strenuous. Most importantly, evictions remain on an individual’s rental Consolidated Plan FRESNO 154 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) history for 7-years, serving as a major barrier to obtaining quality affordable housing for an extended period of time. Strategy to Remove or Ameliorate the Barriers to Affordable Housing The report Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates identified “the inadequate supply of decent quality affordable housing” as a causal factor in evictions, explaining that the smaller supply leads to greater demand for affordable units, and that the impact to evicted tenants is much more severe than the impact to landlords who can quickly fill a vacant unit. Policy solutions proposed in the report include the creation of anti-displacement ordinances and the implementation of initiatives identified in the 2015-2023 Housing Element. Additional anti- displacement ordinances in Fresno would fill important gaps left by the state’s Tenant Protection Act, which provides a cap on rent increases to 5% plus inflation, up to twice per year, for residents in a unit longer than 12 months. SP-60 Homelessness Strategy – 91.215(d) Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs The City of Fresno is an active member of the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care. The goals of this strategic plan align with the goals developed as part of the Continuum of Care’s planning and evaluation processes focused on homelessness in Fresno. Recommendations for outreach and engagement from Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) include: • Use HMIS as tool for coordinating street outreach to ensure streamlined and non‑duplicative access to housing and other resources. • Use a hotline to screen and refer individuals to MAP Point for in‑person services or to the coordinated outreach team for follow up with unsheltered persons who need immediate assistance. • Create a mechanism to coordinate street outreach. Encourage all outreach teams to participate in HMIS and the BNL (by name list) processes that are hosted by FMCoC and the Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC). These goals are reflected in the strategic plan goals of this Consolidated Plan. The City funds outreach and related service providers through the Emergency Solutions Grants program. In 2020, the City’s ESG program will receive funds to support street outreach. Addressing the emergency and transitional housing needs of homeless persons Recommendations for addressing emergency and transitional housing needs of persons experiencing homelessness included in Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) include: • Create new low‑barrier crisis housing options, including bridge housing, engagement centers, navigation centers, and safe havens. Specifically, invest in small 24/7 low‑barrier residential programs (30–75 people daily) in diverse locations. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 155 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Provide adequate ongoing operating and services funding for the crisis housing option to ensure that the program is high‑quality, effective, and cost‑efficient. • Choose sites that are convenient to public transportation. Don’t over‑concentrate crisis housing options in one neighborhood. • Consider creative reuse of existing structures, even if only available for a transitional basis (e.g. 2–5 years). These goals are reflected in the strategic plan goals of this Consolidated Plan. The City funds emergency and transitional housing and related service providers through the CDBG and Emergency Solutions Grants program. In 2020, the City’s ESG program will receive funds to support emergency shelter and transitional housing (TBD). Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again. The City of Fresno and the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care support a Housing First model that prioritizes permanent housing and offers case management and other support services. Recommendations for addressing emergency and transitional housing needs of persons experiencing homelessness included in Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) include: • Increase permanent supportive housing o Deploy housing vouchers with services for chronically homeless individuals and families o Preserve affordable housing and set aside a portion of the units for PSH o Build new PSH using Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) and other affordable rental housing development tools • Aggressively expand non‑traditional permanent housing options o Improve and expand independent living—privately owned homes or complexes that provide housing for adults with mental illness and other disabling health conditions o Develop worker dormitories/bunk houses for employed individuals. o Develop shared housing options, including using written agreements to formalize the co‑residence of two or more families within the same housing unit where each family contributes to the household’s finances using their own income or benefits. • Scale up rapid rehousing to connect families and individuals experiencing homelessness to permanent housing through a tailored package of assistance that may include the use of time‑limited financial assistance and targeted supportive services. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 156 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Ensure sufficient investment in housing resources to avoid bottleneck in crisis housing options. These include housing relocation and landlord mitigation funds, rapid re‑housing, permanent supportive housing and other housing options. • Recruit landlords to participate in a centralized listing process by making currently vacant units available to individuals and families in search of housing. • Create a risk mitigation fund to cover costs due to excessive damage done to a unit beyond what the security deposit will pay. Over the next five years, the City will continue to support homeless service providers, funders, and stakeholders who recognize the need to shift focus and resources to long-term, permanent housing in order to end homelessness. The City will fund organizations that provide rapid rehousing, case management, and housing navigation services to assist homeless individuals and families, including those staying in emergency shelter, make the transition to permanent housing and prevent returns to homelessness. In 2020, the City will fund organizations that provide rapid rehousing, case management, and other supportive services for people transitioning from homelessness to permanent housing. The City will also work to increase the availability of affordable housing in Fresno by using CDBG funds for home rehabilitation and to support the development of new affordable rental housing. Help low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low-income individuals and families who are likely to become homeless after being discharged from a publicly funded institution or system of care, or who are receiving assistance from public and private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education or youth needs. Housing and service providers in Fresno work together to prevent homelessness in populations who are vulnerable to or at risk of homelessness. These groups include extremely low-income individuals and families, people discharged from institutions, and those receiving assistance from agencies addressing a variety of needs, such as housing, health, social services, education or youth needs. Recommendations for helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless included in Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) include: • Scale up diversion and make consistent across community. For households that are screened as currently homeless or at imminent risk, a diversion consultation should be offered. These goals are reflected in the strategic plan goals of this Consolidated Plan. The City funds homelessness prevention through Emergency Solutions Grants and HOPWA programs. In 2020, the City’s ESG program will receive funds to support homelessness prevention. The HOPWA program will fund a variety of homelessness prevention programs, including supportive services, housing information and referral services, tenant-based rental assistance, and short- term rent, mortgage, and utility assistance. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 157 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) SP-65 Lead based paint Hazards – 91.215(i) Actions to address LBP hazards and increase access to housing without LBP hazards The City of Fresno follows HUD’s Lead Safe Housing Rule requirements in all of its federally funded affordable housing development activities. The City also participates in community education to increase awareness of the potential danger of children’s exposure to lead; home environmental screenings; public health nurse case management; and monitoring child health providers to ensure lead testing in high risk children through Fresno County’s Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention program. How are the actions listed above related to the extent of lead poisoning and hazards? Following the Lead Safe Housing Rule requirements in federally funded housing activities reduces risk of lead poisoning and hazards. The Lead Safe Housing Rule is designed to reduce hazards relating to lead-based paint in housing, which include irreversible health effects, brain and nervous system damage, reduced intelligence, and learning disabilities. Children, pregnant women, and workers are most at risk of experiencing negative health effects resulting from exposure to lead-based paint hazards. More than 20 million homes built before 1978 contain lead-based paint hazards. For these reasons, it is vital that the City of Fresno reduce lead- based paint hazards in all federally funded housing activities. How are the actions listed above integrated into housing policies and procedures? The City of Fresno integrates Lead Safe Housing Rule requirements into housing policies and procedures by participating in the County’s Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention program, as described above, and following HUD’s Lead Safe Housing Rule requirements in all of the City’s federally-funded affordable housing development activities. SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy – 91.215(j) Jurisdiction Goals, Programs and Policies for reducing the number of Poverty- Level Families According to the 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-year estimates, the city of Fresno’s poverty rate is estimated at 28.4 percent, above the statewide poverty rate of 15.1 percent. The city’s poverty rate has increased slightly since the 2008-2012 5-year estimates, which estimated poverty in the city at 27.5 percent. The City of Fresno General Plan (2015-2023), Street2Home Fresno County (2018), the City of Fresno Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (2015-2020), and other local and regional plans detail goals for reducing poverty in the city of Fresno and the county, including: Consolidated Plan FRESNO 158 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Economic and Workforce Development • Upgrade and expand the capacity for skill training and development in Fresno in order to have a workforce that is compatible with current labor demands and commensurate with the economic growth trends of Fresno County and the industrial diversification of the economy that Fresno City and Fresno County are striving to attract to the area. • Stabilize and enhance the business and economic environment of the overall area of the City of Fresno. Activities should be designed and pursued that will help the City attract more industrial diversification and become a greater participant in the regional economic sector while maintaining the viability of the existing retail, commercial and distribution entities. • Provide assistance to existing local businesses, through supporting area revitalization initiatives of existing commercial retail centers, where needed, and improving the access to and availability of capital and credit for local businesses. • Promote labor support programs which enhance the quality of the target area’s labor force and assist them in obtaining new employment opportunities. Housing and Homelessness • Preserve affordable housing options. • Create new, low-barrier crisis housing options. • Scale up rapid rehousing. • Increase permanent supportive housing. • Aggressively expand non-traditional permanent housing options. • Align community programs to create a comprehensive crisis response network that provides person‑centered and housing‑focused service. • Emphasize the opportunity for a diversity of districts, neighborhoods and housing types. • Provide adequate sites for housing development to accommodate a range of housing by type, size, location, price, and tenure. • Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. • Address, and where possible, remove any potential governmental constraints to housing production and affordability. • Conserve and improve the condition of Fresno’s existing housing stock. • Continue to promote equal housing opportunity in the City’s housing market regardless of age, disability/medical condition, race, sex, marital status, ethnic background, source of income, and other factors. How are the Jurisdiction’s poverty reducing goals, programs, and policies coordinated with this affordable housing plan The affordable housing, workforce development, and homelessness programs detailed in this plan aim to support the achievement of the housing and economic development goals in Fresno. To combat poverty and reduce the number of poverty-level families, the City has devoted resources to public service programs, including supporting individuals and families in Consolidated Plan FRESNO 159 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) poverty through workforce development, job training, and employment referral. Workforce Connection also provides support in all aspects of employment, including basic career services, career guidance, skill level evaluations, educational and training opportunities, job readiness workshops, training, and supportive services. This Plan continues to identify assisting persons living in poverty as a goal for the CDBG program. The City will continue to fund services to assist individuals in obtaining housing, employment, and other needs. In addition to economic development programs, many homelessness programs and homeless service providers also address expanded employment opportunities as an avenue for combating poverty. The Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission, for example, offers vocational training, counseling, and job placement services. Programs aimed at educating youth, young adults, and adults also combat poverty by developing skills that will allow residents to secure better jobs at higher wages. This plan also calls for continued support for case management services that connect individuals with employment opportunities while also supporting individuals in meeting other needs, such as housing and supportive services. SP-80 Monitoring – 91.230 Describe the standards and procedures that the jurisdiction will use to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of the plan and will use to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements Monitoring Plan The City of Fresno has established a monitoring system to ensure that federal regulations, local policies and program guidelines are met. The monitoring system encompasses both entitlement program monitoring and project monitoring. The City of Fresno's Monitoring Plan for the Consolidated Plan and each annual Action Plan was established to meet three primary goals: 1. Ensure that all activities and initiatives funded, in part or in whole, with HUD funds are consistent with the approved Consolidated Plan. 2. Ensure that all projects and or programs funded are implemented by a competent subrecipient and administered in a timely and financially prudent manner; and that all funds expended are in compliance with federal regulations. 3. Ensure that all activities funded are evaluated and monitored regularly, and that performance is assessed and reported. Entitlement Program Monitoring Each entitlement program has specific monitoring requirements such as timely use of funds, commitment requirements, and uniform administrative requirements that must be met. The City of Fresno tracks these activities throughout the fiscal year. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 160 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Project/Activity Monitoring and Administration City of Fresno Staff will determine that the national objective, activity eligibility and appropriate regulatory requirements to monitor the activity/project are established. Monitoring activities include, but are not limited to, compliance with national objectives, labor standards, financial management, and environmental assessments. Staff conducts desk monitoring of drawdown requests quarterly. Site monitoring of financial documents and activities occur at least once during the program year. Agencies that are new to receiving grant funds are monitored more frequently, generally two to three times during the program year. Site visits of the activity/project funded are conducted once a year. However, rehabilitation and construction projects are monitored by Project Managers, Housing Specialists and a labor standards review throughout the construction period and the affordability terms. Minority Business Outreach (MBE/WBE) The City of Fresno has established a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (MBE) Program in accordance with the regulations of the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City of Fresno in the past has received federal financial assistance from HUD and as a condition of receiving this future/ongoing assistance, the City of Fresno has signed an assurance that it will comply with 24 CFR Subtitle A, Part 85, Subpart C, §85.36. It is the policy and commitment of the City of Fresno to ensure that MBEs as defined in part 24, have an equal opportunity to receive and participate in HUD‐assisted contracts. It is also our policy: 1. To ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of HUD‐assisted contracts; 2. To create a level playing field on which MBEs can compete fairly for contracts and subcontracts relating to construction, professional services, supplies, equipment, materials and other services for HUD‐assisted contracts; 3. To ensure that the MBE Program is narrowly tailored in accordance with applicable law; 4. To ensure that only firms that meet 24 CFR Subtitle A, Part 85, Subpart C, §85.36 eligibility standards are permitted to participate as MBEs; 5. To help remove barriers to the participation of MBEs in HUD‐assisted contracts; 6. To assist the development of firms that can compete successfully in the marketplace outside the MBE Program; and 7. To outreach to local firms and encourage certification and participation in the MBE Program. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 161 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) EXPECTED RESOURCES AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.220(c)(1,2) Introduction Table 55 shows the City’s anticipated grant funding for the 2020 program year, along with an estimate of anticipated grant funding for the remaining years covered by this Consolidated Plan. The estimates for CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA assume level funding over the five years of the Consolidated Plan period at 100% of the 2020 allocation amounts. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 162 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Anticipated Resources TABLE 55 - EXPECTED RESOURCES – PRIORITY TABLE Program Source of Funds Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount Available Remainder of ConPlan $ Narrative Description Annual Allocation: $ Program Income: $ Prior Year Resources: $ Total: $ CDBG Public - Federal • Housing Rehabilitation • Senior Paint Program • Economic Development • Housing • Street and Sidewalk Improvements • Public Services • Nonprofit facilities • Park Improvements • Programmatic Compliance • Fair Housing Education and Assistance $7,112,639 $125,000 $12,679 $7,250,318 $28,950,556 Anticipated funding will include Entitlement grant funds, program income, and prior year resources. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 163 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Program Source Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Narrative HOME Public - Federal • Affordable Housing Development or Rehabilitation • CHDO Set Aside • Tenant-Based Rental Assistance • HOME Program Administration $3,255,075 $205,000 $0 $3,460,075 $13,840,299 Anticipated funding will include Entitlement grant funds and program income. ESG Public - Federal • Homeless Management Info System • Homeless Prevention • Outreach/ Emergency Shelter • Rapid Rehousing • Homeless Programs Administration $610,018 N/A $63,212 $673,230 $2,440,072 Anticipated funding will include Entitlement grant funds and prior year resources. HOPWA Public - Federal • STRMU • Short Term or Transitional Housing Facilities • TBRA $636,124 N/A $0 $636,124 $2,544,496 Anticipated funding consists of Entitlement grant funds. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 164 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied Leverage, in the context of entitlement funding, means bringing in other local, state, federal, and private-sector financial resources to maximize the reach and impact of the City’s HUD funded programs. Like many other federal agencies, HUD encourages its grant recipients to strategically leverage additional funds in order to achieve greater results. Leverage is also a way to increase project efficiencies and benefit from economies of scale that often come with combining sources of funding for similar or expanded scopes. In addition to the entitlement dollars listed in Table 55, the federal government has several other funding programs for community development and affordable housing activities. These include: Fair Housing Initiatives Program; Lead Based Paint; Choice Neighborhoods; the Supportive Housing Program; Section 202, Section 811; Youthbuild; the Housing Choice Voucher Program; the Affordable Housing Program (AHP) through the Federal Home Loan Bank, and others. It should be noted that in most cases the City would not be the applicant for these funding sources as many of these programs offer assistance to affordable housing developers and nonprofits rather than local jurisdictions. In California, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) administer a variety of statewide public affordable housing programs that offer assistance to nonprofit affordable housing developers. Examples of HCD’s programs include the Multifamily Housing Program (MHP), Affordable Housing Innovation Fund (AHIF), Building Equity and Growth in Neighborhoods Program (BEGIN), and CalHOME. Many HCD programs have historically been funded by one‐time State bond issuances and, as such, are subject to limited availability of funding. CalHFA offers multiple mortgage loan programs, down payment assistance programs, and funding for the construction, acquisition, and rehabilitation of affordable ownership units. The National Housing Trust Fund (HTF) is a new affordable housing production program that will complement existing federal, state and local efforts to increase and preserve the supply of decent, safe, and sanitary affordable housing for extremely low‐ and very low‐income households, including homeless families.27 States and state‐designated entities are eligible grantees for the HTF. HUD will allocate HTF funds by formula annually. A state must use at least 80 percent of each annual grant for rental housing; up to 10 percent for homeownership; and up to 10 percent for the grantee's reasonable administrative and planning costs. The State also administers the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits program, a widely used financing source for affordable housing projects. As with the other federal grant programs discussed above, the City of Fresno would not apply for these funding sources. Rather, local affordable housing developers could apply for funding through these programs for particular developments in the City. 27 HUD Exchange. “Housing Trust Fund.” https://www.hudexchange.info/htf Consolidated Plan FRESNO 165 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Over the Consolidated Plan cycle, there are several specific sources of additional funding, particularly related to homelessness, already identified and planned for use within the greater Fresno community. These sources include: • HUD funding to the Fresno-Madera Continuum of Care estimated at $10.7 million per year based on 2018 figures (estimate is based on 46% of the CoC’s total award representing the City’s share of the Fresno and Madera County populations); • CalHome funding of $2 million for mobile home rehabilitation; • Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention Program (HHAPP) funding through a one-time state bond issue ($6.15 million for the City of Fresno and $2.95 million for the Fresno-Madera CoC). As a recipient of HOME and ESG funding, the City is required to generate matching funds. For the HOME Program, the City is required to match twenty-five percent of all project expenditures. In recent years, and for PY 2020, HUD has waived the City’s HOME match requirement based on fiscal distress criteria. In PY 2020, the City will continue to seek HOME match funds to contribute to future year match liabilities. Examples of matching funds under the HOME Program include private financing and interest subsidies from homebuyer and residential rehabilitation programs. ESG requires a 100% match of program funds. The City passes this matching requirement on to the service providers receiving ESG funds. ESG providers meet this requirement through the use of private donations, state grants, and/or volunteer hours. The City may also provide general funds to service providers in order to meet match requirements. If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan The City maintains a list of vacant city-owned real estate parcels that could potentially be used for opportunities arising in connection with needs identified in this plan. The current list consists of 176 parcels. Of those, 150 (approximately 204 total acres) are located south of Shields Avenue and 7 (totaling 18 acres) are within what the City terms “High Opportunity Areas”. City staff are currently assessing the list of vacant parcels against the priorities and objectives of the draft strategic plan and will provide additional information on anticipated use of any of these city- owned properties in the final report. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 166 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) ANNUAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives Goals Summary Information TABLE 56 – GOALS SUMMARY Sort Order Goal Name Start Year End Year Category Geographic Area Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator 1 Homelessness and the Prevention of Homelessness 2020 2024 Homeless Citywide Homelessness ESG: $627,479571 HOPWA: $617,040 • Tenant-Based Rental Assistance/Rapid Rehousing: 180 households assisted • Homeless Person Overnight Shelter: 500 persons assisted • Public service activities for low/moderate-income housing benefit: 36 persons assisted 2 Safe and Affordable Housing 2020 2024 Affordable Housing Citywide Affordable Housing CDBG: $1,378,001408 HOME: $3,114,068 • Rental Units Constructed / Rehabilitated: 26 household housing units • Homeowner Housing Added / Rehabilitated: 54 household housing units 3 Public Infrastructure and Facilities 2020 2024 Non‐Housing Community Development Non‐ Homeless Special Needs Citywide Public Infrastructure and City- Owned Facilities CDBG: $3,095,105 • Public Facility or Infrastructure Activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 10,000 persons assisted Consolidated Plan FRESNO 167 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Sort Order Goal Name Start Year End Year Category Geographic Area Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator 4 Community Services 2020 2024 Non‐Housing Community Development Non‐ Homeless Special Needs Citywide Community Services CDBG: $1,101,900 • Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 2,260 • Micro-enterprise assistance: 40 persons assisted 5 Fair Housing 2020 2024 Other: Fair Housing Citywide Promote Fair Housing CDBG: $50,000 • N/A 6 Compliance 2020 2024 Other: Administration Citywide Programmatic Compliance CDBG: $1,397,529 HOME: $346,008 ESG: $45,751659 HOPWA: $19,084 • Full compliance with adopted Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans, Citizen Participation Plans, and all other applicable regulations (Federal, State, Local, and HUD)N/A 7 Section 108 Loan Repayment 2020 2024 Other: Section 108 Loan Repayment Citywide N/A CDBG: $227,783 • Construction of a Community Center Consolidated Plan FRESNO 168 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Goal Descriptions Goal 1: Homelessness and the Prevention of Homelessness Provide assistance for the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless through safe low- barrier shelter options, housing first collaborations, and associated supportive services. Goal 2: Safe and Affordable Housing Improve access to affordable housing for low‐income and special needs households by partnering with interested developers to increase development of low-income and affordable housing in high opportunity areas, and by promoting the preservation and rehabilitation of existing affordable housing units. Goal 3: Public Infrastructure and Facilities Promote quality of life and neighborhood revitalization through improvements to current public infrastructure and facilities, and by closing gaps in areas with aging, lower quality, or nonexistent public infrastructure and facilities. Goal 4: Community Services Provide services to low‐income and special needs households that develop human capital and improve quality of life. Goal 5: Fair Housing Provide services to residents and housing providers to advance fair housing. Goal 6: Compliance Plan and administer funding for community development, housing, and homelessness activities with improved transparency, increased community involvement, and full compliance with federal regulations. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 169 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) PROJECTS AP-35 Projects – 91.220(d) Introduction The City of Fresno expects to implement activities under 18 different projects over the 2020 program year toward addressing priority needs. These projects include rehabilitation and development of affordable housing; the delivery of services to residents, particularly to students and seniors; assistance to people experiencing homelessness; support to households in danger of becoming homeless; improvements to parks, sidewalks, and other public facilities; and funding for fair housing activities. These projects are identified in the table below, with additional detail provided in AP-38. Projects TABLE 57 – PROJECT INFORMATION # Project Name 1 Housing Rehabilitation 2 Housing Rehabilitation Program Delivery 3 Senior Paint Program 4 Affordable Housing Development or Rehabilitation 5 Community Housing Development Organization Set-Aside 6 Tenant-Based Rental Assistance 7 Non-Profit Public Services 8 PARCS After School Program 9 PARCS Senior Hot Meals Program 10 Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) 11 Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS 12 Neighborhood Street and Sidewalk Improvements 13 CDBG Program Administration and Planning 14 HOME Program Administration 15 Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS Program Administration 16 Fair Housing 17 Section 108 Repayment 18 Micro-Enterprise Assistance Consolidated Plan FRESNO 170 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs The City’s allocation priorities reflect its focus on highest-priority needs identified through data analysis, extensive community engagement, public survey results, consultation with stakeholders, and reviews of other plans and studies developed for Fresno and its region. The key strategic priorities that emerged from the Consolidated Plan process and that these projects are designed to address are listed below: Homelessness The 500 respondents to the Fresno Housing and Community Needs Survey ranked the City’s homelessness needs above all other types of needs surveyed. Additionally, public meeting participants frequently discussed needs related to homelessness. These included needs for more low-barrier shelter space, case management for people experiencing homelessness, job and skills training, drug/alcohol counseling, and shelters for LGBTQ people that are not coupled to requirements for religious participation. Affordable Housing More than one in three Fresno households (36%) is cost burdened, spending more than 30% of its income on housing expenses; nearly a quarter of the city’s households (22%) spend more than 50%. Cost burdening is particularly pervasive among renters, who make up more 75% of the city’s cost burdened households. Compounding the housing affordability issue is the fact that housing prices have increased far more steeply than household income, meaning that a housing supply that meets all of Fresno’s affordability needs today will be insufficient to do so in the future. Public meeting participants and stakeholders interviewed as part of the development of the Consolidated Plan identified a wide variety of needs related to housing affordability in Fresno. For many, the issue was primarily related to expanding the supply and improving the quality of rental housing. Other needs identified in public meeting breakout groups and ranked highly by survey respondents included energy efficiency improvements, rental assistance, homebuyer assistance, and housing for specific subpopulations (large families, seniors, people with disabilities). Public Infrastructure Other than homelessness-related needs, street, road, and sidewalk improvements were ranked more highly than any other needs queried in the public survey. Public Facilities In public meetings and through the Community Need Scorecard exercise, meeting participants tended to rank parks, gymnasiums, outdoor recreation space, and youth centers among the highest priorities. The priority is also supported by survey results, where these types of city- owned facilities were given priority just behind street, road, and sidewalk improvements. Community Services Stakeholders and public meeting participants, including groups of seniors and teens, were instrumental in identifying these high-priority community services needs. The Community Need Scorecard exercise used in public meeting settings generally shows these types of needs as lower priority than those related to homelessness and affordable housing, yet many of the Consolidated Plan FRESNO 171 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) activity types included in the description of this priority were nonetheless ranked highly by survey respondents. The top five public services needs ranked by survey respondents included drug abuse and crime prevention, child abuse prevention, afterschool services, employment training, and neighborhood deterioration. These needs were frequently named in public meeting settings as well. Fair Housing Survey responses reveal a gap in the community’s understanding of fair housing and a need for greater education and enforcement around this subject. While 64% of respondents reported knowing their fair housing rights, fewer than half (45%) knew where to file a complaint of housing discrimination. Further, 20% of respondents (91 individuals) said they had experienced some form of housing discrimination since living in Fresno, with more than four in five of those instances going unreported. Stakeholder interviews further support this priority and particularly indicate wrongful evictions as a fair housing issue to be addressed. Programmatic Compliance These are necessary administrative costs associated with ensuring effective coordination and delivery of services to Fresno residents. The City of Fresno is committed to ensuring compliance with federal regulations. The City does not anticipate any obstacles to completing the projects it has identified for the 2020 program year. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 172 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-38 Project Summary Project Summary Information 1 Project Name Housing Rehabilitation Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Safe and Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding CDBG: $1,028,001408 Description Address the home repair, building systems, and housing rehabilitation needs of low-income homeowners. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 39 low-income units Location Description Available to income eligible homeowners throughout the City. Planned Activities 21A: General Administration – 24 CFR 570.206 NA: National Objective not applicableTBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 173 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 2 Project Name Housing Rehabilitation Program Delivery Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Safe and Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding CDBG: $200,000 Description CDBG funds will pay for the delivery costs associated with housing rehabilitation targeted to income-eligible households Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity N/A Location Description 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065, Fresno CA 93721 Planned Activities 14H: Rehabilitation Administration (24 CFR 570.202) LMH: Low Mod Housing national objective (24 CFR 570.208(a)(3))TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 174 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 3 Project Name Senior Paint Program Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Safe and Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding CDBG: $150,000 Description CDBG funds will pay for a licensed lead-certified painting contractor to paint the exterior of the home and may include minor repairs, (i.e., screens, broken window panes, loose or damaged gutters, etc.) provided there are enough funds available after deducting the cost of the paint project. This program serves low-income seniors (62 years of age or older) who own and occupy their homes. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 15 low mod income senior households Location Description 2600 Fresno Street, Room 2065, Fresno CA 93721 Planned Activities 14A: Single-Unit Residential Rehabilitation (24 CFR 570.202) LMH: Low Mod Housing national objective (24 CFR 570.208(a)(3))TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 175 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 4 Project Name Affordable Housing Development or Rehabilitation Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Safe and Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding HOME: $1,914,018 Description HOME funds will be loaned to local affordable housing developers to finance the development or rehabilitation of rental housing projects affordable to low-income households Target Date 06/30/2023 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 24 new housing units Location Description TBD Planned Activities Development/Rehabilitation of Rental Housing Consolidated Plan FRESNO 176 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 5 Project Name Community Housing Development Organization Set-Aside Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Safe and Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding HOME: $488,261 Description HOME funds will be loaned to a qualified Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) to finance the development of housing affordable to low-income households. Developments may be either rental or homebuyer. Target Date 06/30/2023 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 2 new single-family housing units Location Description TBD Planned Activities Rental Housing Development or Homebuyer Housing Development Consolidated Plan FRESNO 177 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 6 Project Name Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Safe and Affordable Housing Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Funding HOME: $711,789 Description HOME funds will be used to subsidize private market units for homeless and low-income households to increase affordability. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 65 low-income households Location Description Citywide Planned Activities Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Consolidated Plan FRESNO 178 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 7 Project Name Non-Profit Public Services Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Community Services Needs Addressed Community Services Funding CDBG: $161,000 Description CDBG funds will be provided to local non-profits to support programs that serve predominantly low and moderate income clientele. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 560 persons Location Description TBD Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 179 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 8 Project Name PARCS After School Program Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Community Services Needs Addressed Community Services Funding CDBG: $718,100 Description Programs after school on weekdays and Saturday programming for targeted neighborhood community centers to provide enrichment activities, homework assistance, career development, socialization, crime & drug prevention, and meal supplements for low and very low-income youth Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 700 youth Location Description Various community centers in low/mod income areas 1. Dickey Youth Development Center 2. Einstein Neighborhood Center 3. Fink White Neighborhood Center 4. Frank H. Ball Neighborhood Center 5. Holmes Neighborhood Center 6. Lafayette Neighborhood Center 7. Maxie L Parks Community Center 8. Quigley Neighborhood Center 9. Romain Community Center 10. Ted C. Wills Community Center Planned Activities 05D: Youth Services – 24 CFR 570.201(e) LMC: Limited Clientele – 24 CFR 570.208(a)(2) using Nature/Location Presumption Consolidated Plan FRESNO 180 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 9 Project Name PARCS Senior Hot Meal Program Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Community Services Needs Addressed Community Services Funding CDBG: $187,800 Description Weekday enrichment programming for limited clientele in targeted neighborhood community centers; compliments senior meal activity. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 1,000 seniors Location Description Various locations include: 1. Lafayette Neighborhood Center 2. Mary Ella Brown Community Center 3. Mosqueda Community Center 4. Pinedale Community Center 5. Senior Citizens Village 6. Ted C. Wills Community Center 7. Inspiration Park Planned Activities 05C: Senior Services – 24 CFR 570.201(e) LMC: Limited Clientele – 24 CFR 570.208(a)(2) – Presumed Benefit Consolidated Plan FRESNO 181 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 10 Project Name Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Homelessness and the Prevention of Homelessness Needs Addressed Homelessness Funding ESG: $673,230 Description ESG funds will be used to provide homeless prevention services, shelter assistance to homeless and persons at risk of homelessness, to provide rapid rehousing services to homeless and persons at risk of homelessness, and to administer the grant program. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 10 Units of homeless prevention 480 persons provided overnight shelter 95 units of rapid rehousing Location Description TBD Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 182 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 11 Project Name Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Homelessness and the Prevention of Homelessness Needs Addressed Homelessness Funding HOPWA: $617,040 Description HOPWA funds will be used to provide housing assistance and housing-related supportive services for persons living with AIDS/HIV and their families. HOPWA funds will be used for supportive services, housing information and referral services, tenant-based rental assistance, short-term rent, mortgage, and utility assistance. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 66 persons (20 persons/households assisted with TBRA, 20 persons with housing in a short-term facility, and 26 persons/households with STRMU Location Description TBD Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 183 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 12 Project Name Neighborhood Street and Sidewalk Improvements Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Public Infrastructure and Facilities Needs Addressed Public Infrastructure and City-Owned Facilities Funding CDBG: $3,095,105 Description 1. Yosemite Middle School Complete Streets (year one of multi-year project) $300,000 2. Highway City Neighborhood Street Reconstruction (year one of multi-year project) $615,000 3. West Fresno Elementary & MLK Neighborhood Street Improvements $1,200,000(year one of multi-year project) 4. Burroughs Elementary Neighborhood Street Reconstruction $801,105 5. Ericson Elementary Neighborhood Street Reconstruction (year one of multi-year project) $179,000 Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 10,000 persons residing in selected residential service areas Location Description Proposed areas are listed in the description section Planned Activities 03K: Street Improvements – 24 CFR 570.201(c) LMA – Low Moderate Income Areas – 24 CFR 570.208(a)TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 184 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 13 Project Name CDBG Program Administration and Planning Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Compliance Needs Addressed Programmatic Compliance Funding CDBG: $1,397,529 Description Grant Monitoring and Administration, Historic Preservation, Environmental Assessments Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity N/A Location Description 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno CA 93721 Planned Activities Objective not applicable 21A: General Administration – 24 CFR 570.206 NA: National Consolidated Plan FRESNO 185 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 14 Project Name HOME Program Administration Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Compliance Needs Addressed Programmatic Compliance Funding HOME: $346,008 Description Grant Monitoring and Administration Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity Not applicable Location Description 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno CA 93721 Planned Activities General Administration and Oversight of the Program and HOME-Funded Projects Consolidated Plan FRESNO 186 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 15 Project Name Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS Program Administration Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Compliance Needs Addressed Programmatic Compliance Funding HOPWA: $19,084 Description HOPWA funds will be used for administrative and compliance oversight activities associated with HOPWA funded projects. Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity Not applicable Location Description 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno CA 93721 Planned Activities Grant administration and oversight Consolidated Plan FRESNO 187 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 16 Project Name Fair Housing Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Fair Housing Needs Addressed Promote Fair Housing Funding CDBG: $50,000 Description CDBG funds will be used to support fair housing outreach and education to ensure fair housing opportunities Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity TBD Location Description TBD Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 188 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 17 Project Name Section 108 Loan Repayment Target Area Citywide Goals Supported N/A Public Infrastructure and Facilities Needs Addressed Public Infrastructure and City-Owned FacilitiesN/A Funding CDBG: $227,783376 Description CDBG funds will be used to pay Section 108 debt service for the construction of a Community Center Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity TBDN/A Location Description 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno CA Planned Activities 19F: Section 108 Planned Repayment NA: National Objective not applicable to 108 repaymentTBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 189 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 18 Project Name Micro-Enterprise Assistance Target Area Citywide Goals Supported Community Services Needs Addressed Community Services Funding CDBG: $35,000 Description TBD Target Date 06/30/2021 Estimate the number and type of persons that will benefit from the proposed activity 40 persons assisted Location Description TBD Planned Activities TBD Consolidated Plan FRESNO 190 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-50 Geographic Distribution – 91.220(f) Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low- income and minority concentration) where assistance will be directed The Consolidated Plan generally allocates CDBG, HOME, and ESG dollars according to low‐and moderate‐income (LMI) census tracts without specification of target areas. The City’s LMI areas include much of south Fresno as well as neighborhoods such as El Dorado Park, Herndon Town, Highway City, Manchester, and Pinedale. Geographic Distribution Not applicable. The City has not established specific target areas to focus the investment of entitlement funds. TABLE 58 - GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION Target Area Percentage of Funds Rationale for the priorities for allocating investments geographically The Consolidated Plan does not formally identify any specific target areas, however input from stakeholders and members of the public has strongly suggested a particular need for investment in south Fresno communities. Southwest and southeast Fresno were frequently described as having the greatest need for public infrastructure and improvements (such as sidewalks and park space) as well as for programs and services to strengthen human capital (such as job training and afterschool programming). The City will spread resources throughout the City, with the understanding that most funding will go toward the improvement of predominantly low- and moderate-income residential areas to include south Fresno. HUD generally awards HOPWA funds on a regional basis to the largest city within a HOPWA- eligible region. Fresno therefore receives and administers HOPWA funding for the entirety of Fresno County, known as its “Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area” or EMSA. The City is required to serve eligible persons living anywhere within the EMSA and not just within City limits. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 191 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AFFORDABLE HOUSING AP-55 Affordable Housing – 91.220(g) Introduction Although entitlement dollars are limited, the City does anticipate expending a significant portion of its federal allocation dollars on the preservation and provision of affordable housing. Over the 2020 program year, the City of Fresno estimates that it will support a total of 260 low- and moderate-income households through rental assistance and the construction and rehabilitation of affordable housing units. Of these 260 households, 180 are expected to be experiencing homelessness and assisted with a tenant-based housing voucher. Of the remaining 80 households 26 are expected to be able to access newly constructed affordable housing and 54 will have their homes rehabilitated. TABLE 59 - ONE YEAR GOALS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY SUPPORT REQUIREMENT One Year Goals for the Number of Households to be Supported Homeless 180 Non-Homeless 80 Special-Needs 0 Total 260 TABLE 60 - ONE YEAR GOALS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY SUPPORT TYPE One Year Goals for the Number of Households Supported Through Rental Assistance 180 The Production of New Units 26 Rehab of Existing Units 54 Acquisition of Existing Units 0 Total 260 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 192 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-60 Public Housing – 91.220(h) Introduction Fresno residents are served by the Housing Authority of the City of Fresno (FH). HUD PIC data reports that there are 651 units of conventional public housing and another 98 units designated for elderly and/or disabled households through the Section 202 and 811 programs. The FH 2020 Annual PHA Plan identifies 506 traditional public housing units, many of which will undergo demolition, disposition, or conversion to RAD in coming years. Actions planned during the next year to address the needs to public housing The FH is continually planning for and working toward improvements to its housing and communities in order to provide its residents with quality housing options. In it’s 2020 Annual Plan, the FH contemplates several mixed-finance developments that would potentially draw upon a variety of financing options, including Public Housing Capital Funds, rental subsidy, Project Based Vouchers, Project Based Rental Assistance Vouchers, and/or Public Housing Operating reserves. In some cases, the FH has planned for the demolition of housing that is obsolete; where public housing units are demolished, the FH will replace them with housing of better quality elsewhere within the city. The FH 2020 Annual Plan states that three of the city’s public housing sites are being considered for disposition and conversion to a different low-income housing type or community facility. These three sites are Pacific Gardens, Yosemite Village – Phase 2, and Fairview Heights Terrace. Seventy-four of the units at Yosemite Village – Phase 2 are also being considered for demolition or disposition to be converted to a Low-Income Housing Tax Credit site. Three sites are also planned for conversion under the RAD program between 2019 and 2021: Yosemite Village (69 units), Parc Grove II (31 units), and Pacific Gardens (22 units). Conversion of these sites under the RAD program may include either demolition, rehabilitation or new construction at these sites. Actions to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership The FH offers a number of activities for residents to increase their involvement in management and set them on the path to homeownership. As identified in its 2020 Annual PHA Plan, the FH conducts a financial literacy course through its Faith and Finance Program. The housing authority has also partnered with Self Help Enterprises to create a homeownership class and financial literacy workshop for residents with higher incomes. FH partners with Habitat for Humanity to help residents achieve homeownership. If the PHA is designated as troubled, describe the manner in which financial assistance will be provided or other assistance Not applicable – the Fresno Housing Authority is not designated as “troubled.” Consolidated Plan FRESNO 193 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities – 91.220(i) Introduction The City of Fresno is covered by the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care, a network of service providers covering Fresno and Madera counties. The Fresno Madera Continuum of Care brings together housing and service providers to meet the needs of individuals and families experiencing homelessness. Describe the jurisdictions one-year goals and actions for reducing and ending homelessness including: Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs Over the next year, the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care and other homeless housing and service providers in the city of Fresno will continue reaching out to homeless persons, including unsheltered persons, through street outreach, day centers, and emergency shelter services. For the 2020 program year, the City will fund organizations and/or projects for a variety of activities, including street outreach and needs assessment, through the Emergency Solutions Grants program. Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons During the 2020 program year, the City will fund nonprofit organizations and/or projects for the following emergency shelter and transitional housing activities: • Emergency shelter and supportive services • Rapid rehousing services Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again During the 2020 program year, the City of Fresno will prioritize the funding of permanent housing for people experiencing homelessness. In determining allocation of CDBG and ESG, the City will prioritize low-barrier permanent housing and optional supportive services for individuals and families living in permanent housing, consistent with a Housing First approach. The City will fund nonprofit organizations for the following activities to prevent homelessness and to support people experiencing homelessness make the transition to permanent housing: Consolidated Plan FRESNO 194 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Homelessness prevention • Rapid Rehousing The City will also work to increase the availability of affordable housing in the city by using HOME funds to support the development of affordable housing, including housing for seniors and people with disabilities, and to provide housing rehabilitation for low-income homeowners. Finally, the City will take steps to implement the strategies in its Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, which includes strategies to support housing affordability in the city. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 195 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low-income individuals and families and those who are: being discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions); or, receiving assistance from public or private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs Over the next year, housing and service providers in the City of Fresno will continue to work together to prevent homelessness in populations who are vulnerable to or at risk of homelessness. The City will support the following homelessness prevention programs during the 2020 program year: • Homelessness prevention Consolidated Plan FRESNO 196 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-70 HOPWA Goals - 91.220 (l)(3) The City will continue to prioritize short-term rent, mortgage, and utility assistance; tenant-based rental assistance; and transitional housing throughout the 5-year period covered by this Consolidated Plan. Goals for the number of households to be provided housing through HOPWA funds have increased in proportion with funding increases for the HOPWA program for the 2020 program year. One-year goals for the number of households to be provided housing through the use of HOPWA for: Short-term rent, mortgage, and utility assistance to prevent homelessness of the individual or family (STRMU) 26 Tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA) 20 Units provided in permanent housing facilities developed, leased, or operated with HOPWA funds 0 Units provided in transitional short-term housing facilities developed, leased, or operated with HOPWA funds 20 Total 66 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 197 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) AP-75 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.220(j) Actions planned to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment: The City of Fresno will continue to implement activities that remove barriers to affordable housing, such as its 50% permit fee reduction for residential projects in inner city areas, such as Highway City, Pinedale and Herndon Townsite. In its 2019 Downtown Displacement Report, the City also acknowledged its current opportunity to help preserve affordable housing in downtown and plans to prevent the displacement of current residents through its Downtown Displacement Program. Finally, the city will strengthen its police services in high crime areas and increase its provision of fair housing services to aid neighborhoods where affordable housing already exists. AP-85 Other Actions – 91.220(k) Introduction This section details the City of Fresno’s actions planned to ensure safe and affordable housing for its residents, along with plans to meet underserved needs, reduce poverty, develop institutional structure, and enhance coordination between public and private sector housing and community development agencies. Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs To help remove obstacles to meeting underserved needs and improve service delivery, the City of Fresno supports the continued development of the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care, a comprehensive coordinated homeless housing and services delivery system that assists people experiencing homelessness in making the transition from homelessness to independent or supportive permanent housing, and in accessing education, health and mental health services, employment training, and life skills development. The City will provide funding for the following to address underserved needs: • Homelessness prevention • Outreach/ emergency shelter • Rapid Rehousing • Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS/HIV Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing The City of Fresno will fund multiple programs to foster housing affordability, including continuing to use HOME funds to support development of affordable housing by a local CHDO. In addition to specific programs designed to foster and maintain affordable housing, the City will review its zoning ordinances for prospective barriers to affordable housing development and make amendments as needed. The City is also currently in the process of developing an updated Consolidated Plan FRESNO 198 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. As a result of this study, the City will undertake additional approaches to fostering fair and affordable housing. Actions planned to reduce lead-based paint hazards Over the next year, the City of Fresno will continue to conduct lead-based paint inspections and, if a hazard is found, remediation. These actions will both reduce lead exposure risk and help to maintain the city’s older, lower and moderately priced housing. Any housing rehabilitation activities conducted using HOME and CDBG funds will continue to monitor closely for any potential lead exposure. Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty-level families Over the 2020 program year, the City of Fresno will continue to collaborate with the Continuum of Care through the ESG program to coordinate with homeless, housing, and service providers. Homeless service providers will continue to offer job search and resume assistance and connections to workforce development opportunities, as well as emergency shelter, transitional housing, and services such as food, clothing, and childcare. A focus on development of affordable housing and permanent housing that is located near transportation will also help poverty-level families access more employment opportunities, while lowering transportation and housing costs. Actions planned to develop institutional structure The City of Fresno has developed a robust administrative structure to manage its CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funds. The City’s Department of Housing and Community Development offers seminars for potential subrecipients, CHDOs, and contractors to learn more about the CDBG and HOME programs. In addition to working with organizations, the City’s citizen participation process is designed to make engaged and informed citizens another vital part of the institutional structure. City plans focused on affordable housing, homelessness, and workforce development provide overarching goals and frameworks for collaboration among agencies and the use of federal, state, local, and other funding. Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies The City will work to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies by working to implement the strategies detailed in the Street2Home Fresno County: A Framework for Action (2018) plan, including addressing the gaps in the institutional and service delivery systems discussed in section SP-40 of this plan. Public housing in Fresno is managed by the Fresno Housing Authority. The quasi‐governmental authority is governed by 14 Commissioners – seven of whom are appointed as City Commissioners and seven of whom are appointed as County Commissioners. According to HUD’s data on assisted housing, there are 630 public housing units in the city of Fresno. The Fresno Housing Authority will continue to partner with area agencies and organizations to offer opportunities for residents including: Consolidated Plan FRESNO 199 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Housing counseling for first-time homebuyers • Self-sufficiency training • Services and housing for people experiencing homelessness, through programs such as the Fresno Housing Homeless Pilot Program and rapid rehousing programs • Homelessness prevention Consolidated Plan FRESNO 200 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS AP-90 Program Specific Requirements – 91.220(l)(1,2,4) Introduction Projects planned with CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table (see AP-35). The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out. Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(1) Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out. 1. The total amount of program income that will have been received before the start of the next program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed $0 2. The amount of proceeds from section 108 loan guarantees that will be used during the year to address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in the grantee's strategic plan $0 3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements $0 4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the planned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan. $0 5. The amount of income from float-funded activities $0 Total Program Income $0 Other CDBG Requirements 1. The amount of urgent need activities $0 2a. The estimated percentage of CDBG funds that will be used for activities that benefit persons of low and moderate income. 100% 2b. Specify the years covered that include this Annual Action Plan. PY 2020 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 201 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(2) 1. A description of other forms of investment being used beyond those identified in Section 92.205 is as follows: The City will not employ other forms of investment beyond those identified in Section 92.205. 2. A description of the guidelines that will be used for resale or recapture of HOME funds when used for homebuyer activities as required in 92.254, is as follows: The City will use the recapture provisions in all cases where a homebuyer subsidy exists. For HOME-funded homebuyer assistance loans, the Promissory Note, Deed of Trust, Declaration of Restrictions, and the Homebuyer Agreement are the enforcement mechanisms for the City's recapture provisions. The City will enforce minimum periods of affordability based on the amount of homebuyer subsidy provided to the buyer of not less than: • Five years for less than $15,000, • Ten years for between $15,000-$40,000, and • Fifteen years for more than $40,000. Recapture provisions are based on 24 CFR 92.254 (a) (5) (ii), which stipulates the conditions for recapture of the HOME investment used to assist low-income families in purchasing a home. Homebuyer recapture provisions are included in, or as a deed restriction rider, to the recorded deed of trust that secures a HOME loan Note, and requires recapture of funds if the home does not continue to be the borrower’s principal residence or if all or any part of the property or any interest in it is sold, rented, conveyed or transferred during the duration of the period of affordability. Recapture provisions also stipulate that only the direct subsidy to the homebuyer is subject to recapture, which includes down payment assistance, closing cost, other home assistance provided directly to homebuyer, and the difference between fair market value and the sales price. The net proceeds are the sale price minus the senior loan repayment (other than HOME funds) and any closing costs. If the net proceeds are not sufficient to recapture the full HOME investment plus enable the homeowner to recover the amount of the homeowner’s down payment and any capital improvement investment made by the owner since the purchase, the City may share the net proceeds. The net proceeds may be divided proportionally between the City and the homeowner as set forth in the following mathematical formulas: (𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑥𝑥 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠)(𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠+𝐻𝐻𝑝𝑝𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁𝑝𝑝𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁𝑝𝑝 𝑠𝑠𝐻𝐻𝑖𝑖𝑁𝑁𝑠𝑠𝑁𝑁𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁)=𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻 𝑎𝑎𝐻𝐻𝑝𝑝𝑠𝑠𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁𝑝𝑝 𝑠𝑠𝑁𝑁 𝑝𝑝𝑁𝑁𝑝𝑝𝑎𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑁𝑁𝑠𝑠𝑝𝑝𝑁𝑁𝑠𝑠 (𝐻𝐻𝑝𝑝𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁𝑝𝑝𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁𝑝𝑝 𝑠𝑠𝐻𝐻𝑖𝑖𝑁𝑁𝑠𝑠𝑁𝑁𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁 𝑥𝑥 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠)(𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠+𝐻𝐻𝑝𝑝𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁𝑝𝑝𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁𝑝𝑝 𝑠𝑠𝐻𝐻𝑖𝑖𝑁𝑁𝑠𝑠𝑁𝑁𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁 )=𝐴𝐴𝐻𝐻𝑝𝑝𝑠𝑠𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁𝑝𝑝 ℎ𝑝𝑝𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁𝑝𝑝𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝑁𝑁𝑝𝑝 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 202 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 203 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) In the event of foreclosure, the amount subject to recapture is based on the amount of net proceeds (if any) from the foreclosure sale. 3. A description of the guidelines for resale or recapture that ensures the affordability of units acquired with HOME funds-see 24 CFR 92.254(a)(4)-are as follows: The City does not refinance existing debt for multifamily housing projects. 4. Plans for using HOME funds to refinance existing debt secured by multifamily housing that is rehabilitated with HOME funds along with a description of the refinancing guidelines required that will be used under 24 CFR 92.206(b), are as follows: As required, a portion of funds will be awarded to a City-certified Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) and the general development community for the new construction or substantial rehabilitation of affordable housing units available to lower income residents. The TBRA program will be administered by the Fresno Housing Authority and will be targeted to homeless households as outlined in the Status Update of the City and County of Fresno 10- Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness. Interested parties apply in person at the Fresno Housing Authority located at 1331 Fulton Street, Monday through Thursday between the hours of 8:00 am and 4:00 pm. An assessment and case management assignments are made in order to determine the level of assistance and program determination. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 204 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Reference 91.220(l)(4) 1. Include written standards for providing ESG assistance (may include as attachment) The City will continue to work cooperatively with Fresno County and the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care (FMCoC) to update the ESG Policies and Procedures. A copy of the current document is included in the Appendix. In addition, the City, County and FMCoC are also continuing to update and document written standards. 2. If the Continuum of Care has established centralized or coordinated assessment system that meets HUD requirements, describe that centralized or coordinated assessment system. The Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) is used by all local homeless providers participating in the FMCoC. HMIS is a database used to track performance and outcomes for the agencies. As the HMIS Lead of the FMCoC, the Fresno Housing Authority plays a critical role in coordinating the annual Point-in-Time Count (PITC), collecting data, and distributing results from the annual count. The work of the Housing Authority in this regard meets and exceeds HUD requirements for the implementation and compliance of Homeless Management Information System Standards. The FMCoC’s Coordinated Entry System utilizes a common assessment tool – the Vulnerability Index (VI). The VI gave the community a way to identify and triage individuals most at risk. The VI was enhanced to the Vulnerability Index Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (VI- SPDAT), which further triaged individual’s priority for housing and other services. All member agencies of the FMCoC have committed to using both the assessment tool and the Coordinated Entry System managed in partnership by FMCoC members. The assessment system is a client-centered process that streamlines access to the most appropriate housing interventions for individuals or families experiencing homelessness. The Multi-Agency Access Program (MAP) Point at the Poverello House (Pov) was the first coordinated physical entry point collectively developed by the Community Conversations stakeholder group. The MAP Point at the Pov serves as a physical location of the Coordinated Entry System. The program has proved successful in its first two years and has begun expansion. Main components of this process include: 1. Assessment, 2. Navigation and Case Conferencing, 3. Housing Referral with Choice, and 4. Data Collection and Communication. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 205 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 3. Identify the process for making sub-awards and describe how the ESG allocation is made available to private nonprofit organizations (including community and faith-based organizations). The City will issue a request for applications for the 2020- 2021 program year following the adoption of the consolidated plan by City Council. Prior to this release, the City consulted with the FMCoC on the needs of homeless in the community and the best use of ESG funds per category. Within the HUD defined homeless categories, the City of Fresno has determined the following sub-populations are a high priority for ESG services: • Unsheltered homeless persons who are living outdoors or in other places not intended for human habitation; • Chronically homeless persons; • Homeless veterans; and • Other homeless persons who have been identified as highly vulnerable. In addition, the following populations are also a priority for ESG services in Fresno: • Unaccompanied youth under the age of 18; • Youth aging out of the foster care system; • Victims of domestic violence; and • Households with children. Proposals that propose to serve these populations will be given additional points in the scoring process. Proposals providing ESG services to populations outside of the identified high priority population will be considered for funding. Bidders may propose to provide all or a portion of the ESG eligible activities stated above. Qualified/eligible vendor(s) are those agencies that are State certified non-profit entities, validly existing in California, with a tax-exempt IRS determination letter, as of the date the bid is submitted, or public agencies that are qualified to receive ESG funds under applicable federal rules. Qualified/eligible vendors are those that have a minimum of two years’ experience serving the beneficiary populations and a minimum of two years’ experience utilizing federal, state and/or local funding. Requests for applications will be widely distributed to an electronic distribution list of over 500 e-mail addresses. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 206 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) 4. If the jurisdiction is unable to meet the homeless participation requirement in 24 CFR 576.405(a), the jurisdiction must specify its plan for reaching out to and consulting with homeless or formerly homeless individuals in considering policies and funding decisions regarding facilities and services funded under ESG. During the development of the Consolidated Plan, the City consulted with the FMCoC in making decisions related to ESG funds for the five year cycle. The FMCoC includes representation from the homeless community, which meet the homeless participation requirement in 24 CFR 576.405(a). 5. Describe performance standards for evaluating ESG. The following performance standards are outlined in the City’s adopted written policies, however, updates to the standards are currently under way: 1. Decrease the number of homeless youth and households with children by 10% from the FMCoC Point in Time Count of January 2016. 2. Increase the percentage of participants in transitional housing that move into permanent housing to 80% or more. 3. Increase the percentage of participants that are employed at program exit to 25% or more. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 207 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) APPENDIX A: PUBLIC NOTICES AND CITIZEN OUTREACH Outreach Activities in Support of the November 2019 Workshops and Community Needs Survey • Public notice in the Fresno Bee and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle • Utility bill inserts distributed to 130,000 utility customers in the City of Fresno • Advertisement in CUSD Today (Central Unified School District newsletter) • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers • Digital distribution of flyers to Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools for schools located in the City of Fresno • Project website (www.FresnoConPlanAI.com) logged 818 unique visitors and 994 visits • Facebook posts reached 1,123 individuals and drove 21 engagements • Twitter posts reached 9,652 individuals and drove 45 engagements • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue Consolidated Plan FRESNO 208 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Public Notice - English Consolidated Plan FRESNO 209 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 210 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 211 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Public Notice - Spanish Consolidated Plan FRESNO 212 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Utility Bill Inserts – English, Spanish, Hmong Consolidated Plan FRESNO 213 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Utility Bill Inserts (Continued) – English, Spanish, Hmong Consolidated Plan FRESNO 214 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Advertisement Consolidated Plan FRESNO 215 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 216 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) - Spanish Consolidated Plan FRESNO 217 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) – Hmong Consolidated Plan FRESNO 218 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Project Website: www.FresnoConPlanAI.com Consolidated Plan FRESNO 219 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 220 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 221 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 222 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media - Twitter Social Media – Facebook (separate post for each meeting) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 223 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Media Calendar Posts Consolidated Plan FRESNO 224 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Media Calendar Posts (Continued) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 225 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Outreach Activities in Support of the December 2019 Workshops and Community Needs Survey • Advertisement in the Fresno Bee • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers, distributed to apartment complexes location near the sites of the meetings • Digital distribution of flyers to Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools for schools located in the City of Fresno and sent home with children at select schools near the sites of meetings • Project website (www.FresnoConPlanAI.com) logged 818 unique visitors and 994 visits • Facebook posts reached 29,475 individuals and drove 89 engagements • Twitter posts reached 9,652 individuals and drove 45 engagements • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue. • Door-to-door canvasing by organization H.O.P.E. (Helping Others Pursue Excellence); hung flyers on doors and engaging with neighborhood residents near the locations of the meetings and at the Christmas Parade – distributed approximately 6,000 door hangers. • News story (earned media) at online news site Global Messenger published in Punjabi and English • News story (earned media) at online news site YourCentralValley.com (KSEE/KGPE) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 226 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Advertisement Consolidated Plan FRESNO 227 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 228 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Project Website: www.FresnoConPlanAI.com Consolidated Plan FRESNO 229 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 230 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media – Facebook (separate post for each meeting) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 231 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media – Twitter Consolidated Plan FRESNO 232 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Media Calendar Posts (Selected) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 233 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Door Hanger Consolidated Plan FRESNO 234 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) News Story – Global Messenger (Page 1) - Punjabi and English Consolidated Plan FRESNO 235 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) News Story – Global Messenger (Page 2) - Punjabi and English Consolidated Plan FRESNO 236 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) News Story – Global Messenger (Page 3) - Punjabi and English Consolidated Plan FRESNO 237 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) News Story – Global Messenger (Page 4) - Punjabi and English Consolidated Plan FRESNO 238 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) News Story – YourCentralValley.com Consolidated Plan FRESNO 239 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Outreach Activities in Support of the January 2020 Workshops • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers, distributed to apartment complexes location near the sites of the meetings, and distributed at the Southeast Asian Family Education Conference at Fresno State University • Digital distribution of flyers to Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools for schools located in the City of Fresno and sent home with children at select schools near the sites of meetings • Project website (www.FresnoConPlanAI.com) logged 818 unique visitors and 994 visits • Facebook posts reached 5,800 individuals and drove 99 engagements • Twitter post reached 5,002 individuals and drove 46 engagements • Nextdoor post reached 12,166 individuals • Push notification to 30,000 users of the City’s resident service app, FresGo • Personalized Email to all prior attendees of Community meetings • Email to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue. • Door-to-door canvasing: hung 1,500 flyers on doors and City staff engaged with neighborhood residents near the locations of the meetings • Participation and flyer distribution at community meetings including the El Dorado Neighborhood meeting and the Winchell Elementary School resident meeting • Printed flyers distributed at food distributions and congregations near the site of community meetings, as well as announcements during services • The El Dorado Park CDC created custom flyers and invited residents attending a local event, and by inviting residents to dinner before the meeting to encourage attendance Consolidated Plan FRESNO 240 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) Project Website: www.FresnoConPlanAI.com Consolidated Plan FRESNO 241 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 242 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media – Facebook (separate post for each meeting) Social Media – Twitter Consolidated Plan FRESNO 243 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media – Nextdoor Consolidated Plan FRESNO 244 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) FresGo Push Notification Consolidated Plan FRESNO 245 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Email Distribution – to Previous Attendees Consolidated Plan FRESNO 246 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Media Calendar Posts (Selected) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 247 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Door Hanger Consolidated Plan FRESNO 248 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer Made and Distributed by El Dorado Park CDC Consolidated Plan FRESNO 249 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Outreach Activities in Support of the February 13, 2020 Workshop • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers • Digital distribution of flyers to Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools for schools located in the City of Fresno and sent home with children at select schools near the sites of meetings • Project website (www.FresnoConPlanAI.com) logged 818 unique visitors and 994 visits • Facebook post reached 2,400 individuals and drove 62 engagements • Twitter post reached 2,285 individuals and drove 36 engagements • Nextdoor post reached 9,761 individuals • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients, 12 Community Development Corporations located in the City of Fresno, Central California Legal Services, and Fair Housing Council of Central California • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 250 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 251 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Project Website: www.FresnoConPlanAI.com Consolidated Plan FRESNO 252 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media – Facebook (separate post for each meeting) Social Media – Twitter Consolidated Plan FRESNO 253 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 254 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media – Nextdoor Consolidated Plan FRESNO 255 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Email Distribution Consolidated Plan FRESNO 256 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Digital Flyer Distribution Example Consolidated Plan FRESNO 257 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Outreach Activities in Support of Public Comment Period & Public Hearings Public Notice of Comment Period – February 21, 2020 • Public Notice of Comment Period & Public Hearings published in The Fresno Bee on February 21, 2020, and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle on February 26, 2020 • Printed notices posted at 18 community and neighborhood centers & Fresno County Libraries • Notice read on-air in Hmong on radio station KBIF • Public workshop with Housing & Community Development Commission held on February 27, 2020 • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Notice posted on the City Clerk’s website Public Review Documents • Draft public review documents distributed to 18 community and neighborhood centers & 11 Fresno County Libraries between February 28, 2020 and March 2, 2020 • Draft documents made available online at Fresno City Clerk website and City of Fresno Housing and Community Development website • Announcement and links to documents posted on Facebook and Twitter • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients First Extension of Public Comment Period • Public Notice extending end of comment period from March 31, 2020 to April 3, 2020 published in The Fresno Bee on March 4, 2020, and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle on March, 11, 2020 • Printed notices posted at 18 community and neighborhood centers & Fresno County Libraries • Notice read on-air in Hmong on radio station KBIF • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Notice posted on City Clerk’s website Notice of Continuation of Public Hearings • Public Notice regarding the continuation of Public Hearings from March 25 & April 9 to May 13 and 14 published in The Fresno Bee on March 24, 2020, and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle on April 8, 2020 Consolidated Plan FRESNO 258 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) • Notice read on-air in Hmong on radio station KBIF • Facebook event modified with new date and location & reposted • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Notice posted on the City Clerk’s website Second Extension of Public Comment Period • Public Notice extending end of comment period from March 31, 2020 to April 3, 2020 published in The Fresno Bee on March 4, 2020, and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle on March, 11, 2020 • Notice read on-air in Hmong on radio station KBIF • Notice posted to Twitter • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Notice posted on City Clerk’s website Consolidated Plan FRESNO 259 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Public Notice (Fresno Bee) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 260 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Spanish Language Public Notice (Vida en el Valle) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 261 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Spanish Language Public Notice (Vida en el Valle)- Continued Consolidated Plan FRESNO 262 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Email to 500+ Stakeholders Consolidated Plan FRESNO 263 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media - Facebook Social Media - Twitter Consolidated Plan FRESNO 264 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Email: Public Review Documents Available Consolidated Plan FRESNO 265 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Email: Public Review Documents Available - Continued Consolidated Plan FRESNO 266 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Public Notice: First Extension of Public Comment Period (Fresno Bee) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 267 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Spanish Language Public Notice: First Extension of Public Comment Period (Vida en el Valle) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 268 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Email: First Extension of Public Comment Period Consolidated Plan FRESNO 269 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Public Notice: Continuation of Public Hearings (Fresno Bee) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 270 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Spanish Language Public Notice: Continuation of Public Hearings (Vida en el Valle) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 271 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media - Facebook: Continuation of Public Hearings Consolidated Plan FRESNO 272 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Email: Continuation of Public Hearings Consolidated Plan FRESNO 273 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Email: Continuation of Public Hearings - Continued Consolidated Plan FRESNO 274 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Email: Continuation of Public Hearings - Continued Consolidated Plan FRESNO 275 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Public Notice: Second Extension of Public Comment Period (Fresno Bee) Public Notice: Second Extension of Public Comment Period (Vida en el Valle) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 276 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Social Media - Twitter: Second Extension of Public Comment Period Consolidated Plan FRESNO 277 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Email: Second Extension of Public Comment Period Consolidated Plan FRESNO 278 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) APPENDIX B: CITY OF FRESNO REVISED CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN It is the policy of the City of Fresno (City) to provide for full involvement by the community and its residents in the planning, development, implementation and evaluation of programs funded by the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development, including the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships Act (HOME), HEARTH Emergency Solutions Grant (HESG) and the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS/HIV (HOPWA) programs. This Citizen Participation Plan (CPP) sets forth the procedures and guidelines to be implemented by the City to provide for the continuing participation by the citizens of Fresno. The City acknowledges the need for, and the role, of citizen involvement, but also recognizes that the final determination and responsibility for policy development rests with the City Council. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 279 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Citizen Participation Plan Introduction The City of Fresno (City) is a federal entitlement jurisdiction that receives federal grant funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City of Fresno receives federal entitlement grant funding for the following program: ● Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) ● HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) ● Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS (HOPWA) ● Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) As an entitlement jurisdiction, the City is required to prepare a: ● Five Year Consolidated Plan (Consolidated Plan) ● Annual Action Plan (Action Plan) ● Annual Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) Under HUD’s Code of Final Regulations for the Consolidated Plan (24 CFR Part 91 Sec. 91.105), the City must adopt a Citizen Participation Plan (CPP) that sets forth the City’s policies and procedures for citizen participation in the planning, execution, and evaluation of the Consolidated Plan, Action Plans, and CAPER. This CPP provides guidelines for the City to provide and encourage public participation by residents, community stakeholders, and grant beneficiaries in the process of drafting, implementing, and evaluating the Consolidated Plan and related documents. The citizen participation process includes outreach, public hearings, community forums, and opportunities for comment. Definitions ● Annual Action Plan: The Action Plan summarizes the activities that will be undertaken in the upcoming Fiscal Year (FY) to meet the goals outlined in the Consolidated Plan. The Action Plan also identifies the federal and non‐federal resources that will be used to meet the goals of the approved Consolidated Plan. ● Citizen Participation Plan: The CPP provides guidelines by which the City will promote engagement in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of the distribution of federal funds, as outlined in the Consolidated Plan, Action Plan, and CAPERs. ● Community Development Block Grant: HUD’s CDBG program provides communities with resources to address a wide range of housing and community development needs that benefit very low and low‐income persons and areas. ● Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report: The CAPER assesses the City’s annual achievements relative to the goals in the Consolidated Plan and proposed activities in the Action Plan. HUD requires the City to prepare a CAPER at the end of each fiscal year. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 280 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) ● Department Of Housing And Urban Development: HUD is the federal government agency that creates and manages programs pertaining to federal home ownership, affordable housing, fair housing, homelessness, and community and housing development. ● Displacement: Displacement refers to the involuntary relocation of individuals from their residences due to housing development and rehabilitation activities paid for by federal funds. ● Eligible Activity: Activities that are allowable uses of the CDBG funds covered by the CPP as defined in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 24 for HUD. ● Emergency Solutions Grant: HUD’s ESG program provides communities with resources to serve homeless individuals and families via Street Outreach, Emergency Shelter, Homelessness Prevention, Rapid Re‐Housing Assistance, Homeless Management Information System (HMIS), and Administrative Activities. ● Entitlement Jurisdiction: A city with a population of at least 50,000, a central city of a metropolitan area, or a qualified urban county with a population of at least 200,000 that receives grant funding from HUD. ● Five Year Consolidated Plan: HUD requires entitlement jurisdictions to prepare a Consolidated Plan every five years. The Consolidated Plan is a strategic plan that identifies housing, economic, and community development needs and prioritizes funding to address those needs over a five‐year period. ● HOME Investment Partnerships Program: The HUD HOME program provides resources to fund a wide range of activities that build, buy, and/or rehabilitate affordable rental or homeownership housing or provide direct rental assistance to low‐income people. ● Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS: The HUD HOPWA program provides resources that benefit low‐income persons medically diagnosed with HIV/AIDS and their families, including housing and social services, chemical dependency treatment, nutritional services, case management, and assistance with daily living. ● Low‐ and Moderate‐Income: As defined annually by HUD, Low‐ and Moderate‐Income (LMI) is 0‐80 percent of area median family income (AMI) for a jurisdiction, with adjustments for smaller or larger families. This includes those individuals presumed by HUD to be principally LMI (abused children, battered spouses, elderly persons, severely disabled adults, homeless persons, illiterate adults, persons living with AIDS and migrant farm workers). HUD utilizes three income levels to define LMI households: o Extremely low‐income: Households earning 30 percent or less than the AMI (subject to specified adjustments for areas with unusually high or low‐incomes) o Very low‐income: Households earning 50 percent or less than the AMI (subject to specified adjustments for areas with unusually high or low‐incomes) o Low‐ and moderate‐income: Households earning 80 percent or less than the AMI (subject to adjustments for areas with unusually high or low‐incomes or housing costs) Consolidated Plan FRESNO 281 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) ● Public Hearing: Public hearings are designed to provide the public the opportunity to make public testimony and comment. Public hearings related to the Consolidated Plan are to be advertised in local newspapers and made accessible to non‐English speakers and individuals with disabilities. ● Substantial Amendments: Amendments are considered “Substantial” whenever one of the following is proposed: o A change in the allocation priorities or a change in the method of fund distribution. o A change which increases or decreases by 25 percent the amount allocated to a category of funding, or a project or activity budget funded by the entitlement grant programs. o To implement an activity using CDBG funds for new programs that were not described in the Consolidated Plan or the current year Annual Action Plan. o To change the purpose or intended beneficiaries of an activity approved for CDBG funding, e.g., instead of primarily benefitting lower income households the activity instead proposes to benefit mostly moderate income households. Roles, Responsibilities, and Contact Information The City of Fresno is a federal entitlement jurisdiction and is a recipient of grant funding from the federal government. The City of Fresno’s Charter established a council and manager form of government. Fresno’s City Council is the elected legislative body of the City and is responsible for approving its Consolidated Plan, Action Plans, Substantial Amendments, and CAPERs prior to their submission to HUD. It is the intent of the City to provide for and encourage citizen participation, with particular emphasis on participation by lower income persons who are beneficiaries of or impacted by entitlement‐ funded activities. The City encourages participation in all stages of the Consolidated Planning process by all residents, including minorities and non‐English speaking persons, as well as persons with mobility, visual or hearing impairments, and residents of assisted housing developments and recipients of tenant‐based assistance. In general, hearings will be held at City Hall due to its central location, convenient access, and disability accessibility. Translation services will be provided when there is an indication that non‐ English speaking persons will be attending. Other reasonable accommodations will be provided on a case‐by‐case basis. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 282 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The General Contact Information for the City’s HUD Entitlement Programs is: City of Fresno Thomas Morgan Planning and Development Department Housing and Community Development Division 2600 Fresno Street Room 3065 Fresno, CA 93721 559.621.8300 Phone 559.621.8721 TTY thomas.morgan@fresno.gov Citizen Participation Policies Public Hearings The City will hold at least two public hearings per year to obtain residents' views and to respond to proposals and questions, to be conducted at a minimum of two different stages of the program year. Together, the hearings must address housing and community development needs, development of proposed activities, proposed strategies and actions for affirmatively furthering fair housing consistent with the AFH, and a review of program performance. At least one of these hearings is held before the proposed consolidated plan is published for comment. At least one public hearing per year will be held before City Council. The City Council public hearings will be held at Fresno City Hall, Council Chambers located at 2600 Fresno Street, Room 2097, Fresno, CA 93721. Listening devices, interpretation services, and other assistance to disabled persons or those with limited English proficiency will be provided upon request, ranging up to five business days prior notification to the City Clerk. Requests for disability‐related modifications or accommodations required to facilitate meeting participation, including requests for auxiliary aids, services or interpreters, require different lead times, ranging up to five business days. For this reason, it is important to provide as much advance notice as possible to ensure availability. Assistive Listening Devices (ALDs) are available upon request. Notice of Hearings and Review Periods To allow the public time to provide comments prior to the submission of approved documents to HUD, the City will hold a minimum 30‐day public review and comment period for the Consolidated Plan, Action Plan, and Substantial Amendment. The City will establish a public review period of at least 15 days for each CAPER and amendments to the CPP. Copies of the draft plans will be available to the public at City of Fresno Development and Resource Management, Room 3065, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 283 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) The City will place public notices at libraries, recreation centers, community centers, online through the City’s website, and through advertisement in the Fresno Bee in advance of a 30‐day public review and comment period. To ensure that the public, including minorities, persons with limited English proficiency, persons with disabilities, residents of public housing, and LMI residents are able to participate in the public review process, the City will provide residents, public agencies, and other stakeholders with notices on applicable public review periods and public hearings that adhere to the following: ● The notices will be published prior to the start of the public comment period and at least 15 days before the final public hearing and will include information regarding how to request accommodation and services available for persons with disabilities who wish to attend the public hearings. The notices will be distributed to persons and agencies on the contact list maintained by the City for those parties expressing interest in receiving information and updates related to the City’s Consolidated Plan, Action Plan, CAPER, Substantial Amendments and CPP. Interested parties may request to be added to this contact list by sending an email to HCDD@fresno.gov, by calling (559) 621‐8300 or by writing to the Fresno Planning and Development, Room 3065, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721. The notices will be distributed through a variety of methods, including email, newspaper publications and the City’s website at www.f resno.gov. The notices will include information on how to obtain a copy of the draft documents and scheduled hearing dates, times, and locations. The public may file comments on draft plans in writing to the Fresno Planning and Development, Room 3065, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721; via email to HCDD@fresno.gov; by phone at (559) 621‐8300. Comments may also be submitted in person to Fresno Planning and Development, Room 3065, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721, Monday through Friday during business hours, and during the Council adoption hearing. When necessary or applicable, the City may combine notices complying with several individual requirements into one comprehensive notice for dissemination and publication. Comments on Adopted Plans Comments from residents, public agencies, and other stakeholders regarding the adopted Consolidated Plan or related amendments and performance reports may be submitted in writing or verbally to the General Contact at Fresno Planning and Development, Room 3065, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721. Written comments will be referred to appropriate City staff for consideration and response. The City will attempt to respond to all comments within 15 business days and maintain a correspondence file for this purpose. HUD officials will consider public concerns regarding the City’s plans and programs described in this Citizen Participation Plan. Written concerns may be submitted to: Kimberly Nash, Director Community Planning and Development Division U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development San Francisco Regional Office, Region IX, One Sansome Street, Suite 1200, San Francisco, CA 94104‐4430. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 284 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Availability of Draft and Approved Documents The draft and final versions of the Consolidated Plan, Action Plan, all related amendments, records, and regulations will be available online at the City’s website: www.fresno.gov. Hard copies of all documents will be available at Fresno Planning and Development, Room 3065, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721 and upon written request. If the City is unable to provide immediate access to the documents requested, it will make every effort to provide the documents and reports within 15 business days from the receipt of the request. During the 30‐day public review and comment period, copies of the document will be available to the public for review at libraries, recreation centers, community centers, and through the City’s website at www.fresno.gov. Displacement Policy As part of the CPP, the City must maintain a displacement policy. Displacement refers to the involuntary relocation of individuals from their residence due to housing development and rehabilitation paid for with federal funds. The City will continue to use existing federal and state relocation guidelines, as applicable, to minimize displacement and to alleviate the problems caused by displacement. Both the federal government and the State of California have specific requirements dictating the amount of benefits and assistance that must be provided to lower income persons and households relocated from their homes as a result of displacement. Depending on the funding source, displaced persons may be offered one or more of the following: ● A rent subsidy for another unit ● A cash payment to be used for rent or a down payment on the purchase of a dwelling unit ● Moving and related expenses The City’s rehabilitation programs may also incur relocation issues when they provide minor additions to existing dwellings in order to address overcrowding. Any temporary relocation costs are included in the rehabilitation package offered to clients. Technical Assistance The City will, to the extent feasible, respond to requests for technical assistance from entities representing LMI groups who are seeking federal entitlement funding in accordance with grant procedures. This may include, but is not limited to, providing information regarding how to fill out applications, other potential funding sources, and referrals to appropriate agencies within and outside the City. "Technical assistance," as used here, does not include the provision of funds to the entities requesting such assistance. Assistance will also be provided by Department of Housing staff to interested individuals and resident groups who need further explanation on the background and intent of the Housing and Community Development Act, interpretation of specific HUD regulations, and project eligibility criteria for federal grants. Consolidated Plan FRESNO 285 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) Development of the Fair Housing Study (AI or successor study) In developing the Fair Housing Study, the City will consult with community-based and regionally- based organizations that represent protected class members, and organizations that enforce fair housing laws, including the Fair Housing Council of Central California and other nonprofit organizations that may receive funding under HUD’s Fair Housing Initiative Program (FHIP) or that may have other specialized knowledge of fair housing within the city. • Introductory Public Hearing: During the preparation of the Fair Housing Study, at least two hearings will be held to obtain the views of the general public on fair housing-related data and affirmatively furthering fair housing in the City’s housing and community development programs. The first public hearing will solicit input on fair housing issues in the city and shall be held during development of the Study, before the draft is published for comment. No later than the date of the first public hearing on the Fair Housing Study, the HUD- provided data and other supplemental data will be made available to the general public. This may include a link to HUD’s website where the data can be readily accessed. • Publication of the Proposed AI: When complete, the City will make available the draft Fair Housing Study for a period of no less than 30 days in a manner that affords citizens, public agencies, and other interested parties a reasonable opportunity to examine its contents and submit comments. Notice of the public comment period on the draft Study will be published in the Fresno Bee. The public notice shall include a brief summary of the content and purpose of the draft Fair Housing Plan, the dates of the public display and comment period, the locations where copies of the draft document can be examined, how comments will be accepted, and when the document will be considered for action by the City Council. A second public hearing will be conducted during or after the 30-day public comment period on the Fair Housing Study during which the City will address identified factors contributing to fair housing issues, and proposed fair housing goals and priorities for affirmatively furthering fair housing. Any comments or views of residents of the community received in writing, or orally at the public hearing, will be considered by the City in preparing the final Fair Housing Study and a summary of these comments or views shall be attached to the final AFH. • Revisions to the Fair Housing Study: The City may revise its Fair Housing Study under the following circumstances: o A material change occurs. A material change is a change in circumstances in the City that affects the information on which the Fair Housing Study is based to the extent that the analysis, the fair housing contributing factors, or the priorities and goals of the Study no longer reflect actual circumstances. Examples include, but are not limited to: Presidentially declared disasters, under Title IV of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), affecting the jurisdiction that are of such a nature as to significantly impact the steps the City may need to take to affirmatively further fair housing Significant demographic changes New significant contributing factors in the city, and Civil rights findings, determinations, settlements (including voluntary compliance agreements), or court orders o Upon HUD's written notification specifying a material change that requires the Consolidated Plan FRESNO 286 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018) revision. Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice PUBLIC DRAFT – February 2020 2 ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE PUBLIC DRAFT – February 2020 CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA Planning and Development Department Housing and Community Development Division Prepared for the City of Fresno by Mosaic Community Planning, LLC 3 Revised 3/2/2020 to extend end of public comment period from 3/31/20 to 4/3/20 This is a draft document that has been made available for public review and comment. The Public Comment Period begins February 28 and concludes on April 3. Written comments are encouraged during this time and may be submitted to the City’s Housing and Community Development Division, 2600 Fresno Street (Room 3065); Fresno, California 93721, or via email to HCDD@fresno.gov. Please indicate “Public Comment” in the subject line of email messages. Residents are invited to comment on the draft documents at two upcoming Public Hearings: Wednesday, March 25, 2020 at 5:00 P.M. Public Hearing regarding the Draft Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments Housing and Community Development Commission Meeting Fresno City Hall; 2600 Fresno Street, Room 2120 Fresno, CA 93721 Thursday, April 9, 2020 at approximately 10:05 A.M. Public Hearing regarding the Draft Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments City Council Meeting Fresno City Hall; 2600 Fresno Street, Council Chamber Fresno, CA 93721 If, as an attendee at a meeting, you need accommodations such as interpreters, signers, assistive listening devices, or the services of a translator, please contact (559) 621-8300 or HCDD@fresno.gov. To ensure availability, you are advised to make the request at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 7 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing .................................................................................................. 7 Definitions ................................................................................................................................................ 8 Data Sources ........................................................................................................................................... 9 CHAPTER 2. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION PROCESS ........................................................................ 11 Community Engagement Overview ..................................................................................................... 11 Public Meetings ................................................................................................................................... 11 Focus Groups ........................................................................................................................................ 9 Stakeholder Interviews .......................................................................................................................... 9 Intercept Interviews ............................................................................................................................... 1 Project Website ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Community Survey ................................................................................................................................ 2 Public Comment Period and Hearing .................................................................................................... 2 Publicity for Community Engagement Activities .................................................................................... 2 Community Engagement Results .......................................................................................................... 2 Community Meetings and Focus Groups .............................................................................................. 3 Stakeholder Interviews .......................................................................................................................... 7 Community Survey .............................................................................................................................. 14 CHAPTER 3. SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE .............................................................................................. 18 Demographic Profile ............................................................................................................................. 18 Race and Ethnicity .............................................................................................................................. 18 National Origin .................................................................................................................................... 18 Limited English Proficiency ................................................................................................................. 19 Disability .............................................................................................................................................. 19 Age ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 Sex ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 Family Type ......................................................................................................................................... 19 Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty ................................................................... 24 CHAPTER 4. SEGREGATION AND INTEGRATION ................................................................................ 29 Race and Ethnicity ................................................................................................................................ 29 Segregation Levels ............................................................................................................................... 36 National Origin and Limited English Proficiency Population ........................................................... 37 CHAPTER 5. ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY .............................................................................................. 43 Overview of HUD-Defined Opportunity Factors ................................................................................. 44 Education ............................................................................................................................................... 47 Employment ........................................................................................................................................... 49 Transportation ....................................................................................................................................... 54 Poverty ................................................................................................................................................... 59 Environmental Health ........................................................................................................................... 64 Food Access .......................................................................................................................................... 68 Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 69 CHAPTER 6. HOUSING PROFILE ............................................................................................................ 71 Housing Supply Summary ................................................................................................................... 71 Housing Costs and Affordability ......................................................................................................... 76 5 Housing Needs ...................................................................................................................................... 78 Homeownership and Lending .............................................................................................................. 87 Mortgage Lending ............................................................................................................................... 93 Evictions and Housing Instability ........................................................................................................ 96 Zoning, Affordability, and Housing Choice ........................................................................................ 98 Intersection of Local Zoning with Federal and State Fair Housing Laws ............................................ 99 City of Fresno Zoning Ordinance Review ......................................................................................... 102 Impact of Zoning Provisions on Affordable Housing ......................................................................... 106 CHAPTER 7. PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING ................................................................................ 113 Supply and Occupancy ...................................................................................................................... 114 Geography of Supported Housing .................................................................................................... 117 Policy Review ...................................................................................................................................... 121 CHAPTER 8. HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES ................................................................ 123 Residential Patterns ............................................................................................................................ 123 Accessible Housing Supply and Affordability ................................................................................. 127 Zoning and Accessibility .................................................................................................................... 128 Definition of “Family” and Group Housing for People with Disabilities.............................................. 128 Reasonable Accommodations .......................................................................................................... 130 CHAPTER 9. FAIR HOUSING ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................. 132 Fair Housing Resources ..................................................................................................................... 132 Fair Housing Complaints .................................................................................................................... 132 Complaints Filed with HUD ............................................................................................................... 134 Complaints Filed with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing ........................ 137 Complaints Filed with the Fair Housing Council of Central California .............................................. 139 Fair Housing Lawsuits and Litigation ............................................................................................... 141 Past Fair Housing Goals and Related Activities .............................................................................. 143 Administrative Impediments .............................................................................................................. 143 Spatial Impediments .......................................................................................................................... 144 Financial/Affordability Impediments .................................................................................................. 144 Discriminatory Impediments .............................................................................................................. 145 CHAPTER 10. IDENTIFICATION OF IMPEDIMENTS ............................................................................. 148 Impediment 1: Lack of Safety Net Programs for Renters Increases Housing Instability Among Protected Classes ........................................................................................................................... 148 Impediment 2: Insufficient Employment Supports Leave Residents of Color with Lower Incomes and Limited Housing Choices ........................................................................................ 148 Impediment 3: Continued Need for Neighborhood Infrastructure Development and Expanded Access to Opportunity in Areas of Concentrated Poverty ......................................................... 149 Impediment 4: Poor Housing Conditions Limit Housing Options for Some Protected Classes .......................................................................................................................................................... 150 Impediment 5: Racial Disparities Limit Access to Homeownership for Some Protected Classes ............................................................................................................................................. 151 Impediment 6: Publicly Supported Housing Options Are Concentrated Outside of Areas of Opportunity ...................................................................................................................................... 152 Impediment 7: Many Communications and Marketing Efforts Regarding Fair Housing Are Not Effectively Targeted to Protected Classes and Non-English Speakers .................................... 152 Impediment 8: NIMBYism and Prejudice Reduces Housing Choice for Protected Classes ... 153 Impediment 9: Individuals Not Understanding Their Housing Rights May Prevent Access to Fair Housing .................................................................................................................................... 153 6 APPENDIX A: PUBLIC NOTICES AND CITIZEN OUTREACH .............................................................. 163 Outreach Activities in Support of the November 2019 Workshops and Community Needs Survey .............................................................................................................................................................. 163 Outreach Activities in Support of the February 13, 2020 Workshop ............................................. 179 Outreach Activities in Support of Public Comment Period & Public Hearings ............................ 186 7 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Equal access to housing choice is crucial to America’s commitment to equality and opportunity for all. Title VIII of the United States Civil Rights Act of 1968, more commonly known as the Fair Housing Act, provides housing opportunity protection by prohibiting discrimination in the sale or rental of housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. The Act was amended in 1988 to provide stiffer penalties, establish an administrative enforcement mechanism and to expand its coverage to prohibit discrimination on the basis of familial status and disability. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), specifically HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the Fair Housing Act and other civil rights laws. Provisions to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) are basic long-standing components of HUD’s housing and community development programs. The AFFH requirements are derived from Section 808(e) (5) of the Fair Housing Act which requires the Secretary of HUD to administer the Department’s housing and urban development programs in a manner to affirmatively further fair housing.1 Local communities, such as Fresno, that receive grant funds from HUD through its entitlement process satisfy this obligation by performing an “Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice” (AI). In an AI, communities evaluate barriers to fair housing choice and develop and implement strategies and actions to overcome any identified impediments based on their individual histories, circumstances, and experiences. Through this process, local entitlement communities promote fair housing choice for all persons, including classes protected under the Fair Housing Act, and provide opportunities for racially and ethnically inclusive patterns of housing occupancy, identify structural and systemic barriers to fair housing choice, and promote housing that is physically accessible and usable by persons with disabilities. HUD will presume that the grantee is meeting its obligation and certification to affirmatively further fair housing by taking actions that address the impediments, including: • Analyzing and eliminating housing discrimination within the jurisdiction; • Promoting fair housing choice for all persons; • Providing opportunities for racially and ethnically inclusive patterns of housing occupancy; • Promoting housing that is physically accessible to all persons to include those persons with disabilities; and • Fostering compliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of the Fair Housing Act. Through its Community Planning and Development (CPD) programs, HUD’s goal is to expand mobility and widen a person’s freedom of choice. The Department also requires Community 1 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. Fair Housing Planning Guide: Volume 1 (Chapter 1: Fair Housing Planning Historical Overview, Page 13). March 1996. 8 Development Block Grant (CDBG) program grantees to document AFFH actions in the annual performance reports that are submitted to HUD. In 2015, HUD published a final rule on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, which outlines procedures that jurisdictions and public housing authorities who participate in HUD programs must take to promote access to fair housing and equal opportunity. This rule stipulates that grantees and housing authorities take meaningful actions to overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected class characteristics. Under HUD’s final rule, grantees must take actions to: • Address disparities in housing need; • Replace segregated living patterns with integrated and balanced living patterns; • Transform racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity; and • Foster and maintain compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws. To assist grantees and housing authorities affirmatively further fair housing, HUD provides publicly available data, maps, and an assessment tool to use to evaluate the state of fair housing within their communities and set locally determined priorities and goals. HUD’s final rule mandated that most grantees begin submitting to HUD an assessment developed using these tools in 2017; however, a 2018 HUD notice withdrew the requirement to prepare such assessments. A subsequent notice further required that grantees instead prepare and keep on file a current Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. HUD’s data and maps remain available for grantees to use in preparing their AIs. Mosaic Community Planning assisted the City of Fresno with the preparation of this Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. This AI follows the requirements in HUD’s Fair Housing Planning Guide but is also compliant with the regulations and assessment tool established in HUD’s 2015 final rule. In several chapters, it incorporates the maps and data developed by HUD for use by grantees as part of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing final rule. Definitions Affirmatively Further Fair Housing – In keeping with the latest proposed guidance from HUD, to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing Choice (AFFH) is to comply with “the 1968 Fair Housing Act’s obligation for state and local governments to improve and achieve more meaningful outcomes from fair housing policies, so that every American has the right to fair housing, regardless of their race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability or familial status.”2 Fair Housing Choice - In carrying out this Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, the City of Fresno used the following definition of “Fair Housing Choice”: • The ability of persons of similar income levels to have available to them the same housing choices regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status,, or handicap. 2 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. “HUD Publishes New Proposed Rule on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Choice.” Press Release No. 13-110. July 19, 2013. 9 Impediments to Fair Housing Choice - As adapted from the HUD Fair Housing Planning Guide, impediments to fair housing choice are understood to include: 3 • Any actions, omissions, or decisions taken because of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin which restrict housing choices or the availability of housing choices. • Any actions, omissions, or decisions which have the effect of restricting housing choices or the availability of housing choices on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin. Protected Classes – The following definition of federally protected classes is used in this document: • Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 prohibits housing discrimination based on race, color, national origin or ancestry, sex, or religion. The 1988 Fair Housing Amendments Act added familial status and mental and physical handicap as protected classes. Affordable – Though local definitions of the term may vary, the definition used throughout this analysis is congruent with HUD’s definition: • HUD defines as "affordable" housing that costs no more than 30% of a household's total monthly gross income. For rental housing, the 30% amount would be inclusive of any tenant-paid utility costs. For homeowners, the 30% amount would include the mortgage payment, property taxes, homeowner’s insurance, and any homeowners’ association fees. Data Sources Decennial Census Data – Data collected by the Decennial Census for 2010 and 2000 is used in this Assessment (older Census data is only used in conjunction with more recent data in order to illustrate trends). The Decennial Census data is used by the U.S. Census Bureau to create several different datasets: • 2010 and 2000 Census Summary File 1 (SF 1) – This dataset contains what is known as “100% data,” meaning that it contains the data collected from every household that participated in the Census and is not based on a representative sample of the population. Though this dataset is very broad in terms of coverage of the total population, it is limited in the depth of the information collected. Basic characteristics such as age, sex, and race are collected, but not more detailed information such as disability status, occupation, and income. The statistics are available for a variety of geographic levels with most tables obtainable down to the census tract or block group level. • 2000 Census Summary File 3 (SF 3) – Containing sample data from approximately one in every six U.S. households, this dataset is compiled from respondents who received 3 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. Fair Housing Planning Guide: Volume 1 (Chapter 2: Preparing for Fair Housing Planning, Page 2-17). March 1996. 10 the “long form” Census survey. This comprehensive and highly detailed dataset contains information on such topics as ancestry, level of education, occupation, commute time to work, and home value. The SF 3 dataset was discontinued for the 2010 Census, but many of the variables from SF 3 are included in the American Community Survey. American Community Survey (ACS) – The American Community Survey is an ongoing statistical survey that samples a small percentage of the U.S. population every year, thus providing communities with more current population and housing data throughout the 10 years between censuses. This approach trades the accuracy of the Decennial Census Data for the relative immediacy of continuously polled data from every year. ACS data is compiled from an annual sample of approximately 3 million addresses rather than an actual count (like the Decennial Census’s SF 1 data) and therefore is susceptible to sampling errors. This data is released in two different formats: single-year estimates and multi-year estimates. • ACS Multi-Year Estimates – More current than Census 2010 data, this dataset is one of the most frequently used. Because sampling error is reduced when estimates are collected over a longer period of time, 5-year estimates will be more accurate (but less recent) than 1-year estimates. The 2012-2016 ACS 5-year estimates are used most often in this assessment. HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool (AFFH-T) – HUD’s AFFH Data and Mapping Tool provides a series of online, interactive maps and data tables to assist grantees in preparing fair housing analyses. Topics covered include demographics and demographic trends; racial and ethnic segregation; housing problems, affordability, and tenure; locations of subsidized housing and Housing Choice Voucher use; and access to educational, employment, and transportation opportunities. This report uses HUD’s latest data and maps, AFFHT0004, which was released in November 2017. HUD’s source data includes the American Community Survey (ACS), Decennial Census / Brown Longitudinal Tract Database (BLTD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD), HUD’s Inventory Management System (IMS) / Public and Indian Housing (PIH) Information Center (PIC), and others. For a complete list of data sources, please see HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Data Documentation available online at https://www.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/AFFH-T-Data- Documentation-AFFHT0004-November-2017.pdf. Previous Works of Research – This AI is supported by, and in some cases builds upon, previous local plans and works of research conducted by or for the City of Fresno or other regional partners, including: • City of Fresno 2015-2019 Consolidated Plan • City of Fresno 2019-2020 Annual Action Plan • City of Fresno Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Reports (CAPERs) for Program Years 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 • 2016 City of Fresno Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice • Fresno General Plan 2015-2023 Housing Element • Greater Fresno Region DRIVE Plan • Fresno Parks Master Plan • Fresno Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan 11 CHAPTER 2. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION PROCESS Community Engagement Overview An important component of the research process for this Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice involved gathering input regarding fair and affordable housing conditions, perceptions, and needs in the Fresno. The project team used a variety of approaches to achieve meaningful public engagement with residents and other stakeholders, including public meetings, focus groups, interviews, a website comment form, and a community-wide survey. Public Meetings Three rounds consisting of a total of 16 public meetings were held to inform residents and other stakeholders of the City’s planning process and to and gather information for the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. The first round of ten meetings was held in early November to introduce the community to the planning process, provide information on ways to get involved, and collect input on housing needs and fair housing concerns. These meetings began with a short overview of the AI followed by an interactive, facilitated discussion of fair housing, neighborhood conditions, and community resources in the community. These public meetings had both Spanish and Hmong interpreters present and were live-captioned to keep the meeting content accessible to participants with disabilities. The meetings were advertised as having refreshments and as welcoming children to encourage attendance. The City of Fresno held three follow-up meetings in December to bolster engagement with residents of key neighborhoods in southwest Fresno. These meetings utilized a small group breakout format, where each group of 2-4 attendees was facilitated by a City of Fresno staff person allowing for more detailed discussion of needs and issues. Finally, a third round of three public meetings was held in January for the purpose of collecting feedback from residents and stakeholders on a draft set of community priorities. These meetings also used a small group breakout format to collect detailed reactions and recommended revisions to the priorities. In all, 168 people attended the public meetings. Meeting dates, times, and locations are shown on the following page. OVER 1,500 FRESNO RESIDENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS WERE ENGAGED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS AI THROUGH MEETINGS, FOCUS GROUPS, INTERVIEWS, A SURVEY, AND INTERACTION WITH THE PROJECT WEBSITE. Public Meeting #1 November 2, 2019 10:30 AM Teague Elementary School 4725 N. Polk Avenue, Fresno, CA 93722 Public Meeting #2 November 2, 2019 1:00 PM Discovery Center 1944 N. Winery Avenue, Fresno, CA 93703 Public Meeting #3 November 2, 2019 3:00 PM Inspiration Park 5770 W. Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 93722 Public Meeting #4 November 4, 2019 6:00 PM Kirk Elementary School 2000 E. Belgravia Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706 Public Meeting #5 November 4, 2019 6:30 PM Pinedale Elementary School 7171 North Sugar Pine Avenue, Fresno, CA 93650 Public Meeting #6 November 4, 2019 6:30 PM Vang Pao Elementary School 4100 E. Heaton Avenue, Fresno, CA 93702 Public Meeting #7 November 5, 2019 4:00 PM Highway City 5140 N. State Street, Fresno, CA 93722 Public Meeting #8 November 5, 2019 6:00 PM Webster Elementary School 2600 E. Tyler Avenue, Fresno, CA 93701 Public Meeting #9 November 5, 2019 6:30 PM Centennial Elementary School 3830 E. Saginaw Way, Fresno, CA 93726 Public Meeting #10 November 6, 2019 5:00 PM City of Fresno City Hall 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, CA 93721 Public Input Feedback Meeting #1 December 9, 2019 6:00 PM Leavenworth Elementary School 4420 E. Thomas Avenue, Fresno, CA 93702 Public Input Feedback Meeting #2 December 10, 2019 5:30 PM Ted C. Willis Community Center 770 N. San Pablo Avenue, Fresno, CA 93728 Public Input Feedback Meeting #3 December 12, 2019 6:00 PM Williams Elementary School 525 W. Saginaw Way, Fresno, CA 93705 Draft Priorities Feedback Meeting #1 January 21, 2020 6:00 PM Sal Mosqueda Community Center 4670 E. Butler Avenue, Fresno, CA 93702 Draft Priorities Feedback Meeting #2 January 22, 2020 6:00 PM Wesley United Methodist Church 1343 E. Barstow Avenue, Fresno, CA 93710 Draft Priorities Feedback Meeting #3 January 23, 2020 6:00 PM West Side Seventh Day Adventist Church 2750 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, Fresno, CA 93706 Fair Housing Community Meeting February 13, 2020 6:00 PM Ted C. Wills Community Center 770 N. San Pablo Avenue, Fresno, CA 93728 8 FIGURE 1. LOCATIONS OF CONSOLIDATED PLAN/ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS COMMUNITY OUTREACH EVENTS 8 9 Focus Groups In addition to the public meetings, two focus groups were held to collect input from youth and seniors on issues related to fair housing. As with the public meetings, these groups typically began with an explanation of the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. The focus group leader them facilitated a discussion of fair and affordable housing needs, neighborhood conditions, and community resources in the City of Fresno. The Senior Focus Group included 36 participants and 30 students participated in the Teen/Pre-Teen Focus Group for a total of 66 participants combined. A list of the focus groups, along with their meeting dates, times, and locations is shown below: Senior Focus Group November 4, 2019 11:30 AM Ted C. Willis Community Center 7770 N. San Pablo Avenue, Fresno, CA 93728 Teen/Pre-Teen Focus Group November 5, 2019 5:30 PM Maxie L. Parks Community Center 1802 E. California Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706 Stakeholder Interviews During the week of November 3, 2019, individual and small group stakeholder interviews were held at locations in Fresno. For people unable to attend an in-person interview, telephone interviews were offered. Stakeholders were identified by City staff and represented a variety of viewpoints including fair housing/legal advocacy, housing, affordable housing, community development and planning, education, employment, homelessness, people with disabilities, and others. Interview invitations were made by email and/or phone to a list of stakeholders compiled by the project team with input from the City of Fresno. A total of 40 stakeholders within the Fresno community participated in an interview with the project team. Organizations from which one or more representatives participated in the development of this AI via an interview, meeting attendance, or any other means include the following: • Access Plus Capital • California Apartment Association • Central California Legal Services • Central Valley Regional Center • City of Fresno Long Range Planning • City of Fresno Public Works • City of Fresno Transportation Department • Elder Abuse Services • Fair Housing Council of Central California • Fresno Building Healthy Community • Fresno City Council • Fresno City Planning Commission • Fresno Council of Governments • Fresno Housing Authority • Fresno Metro Ministry • Fresno Police Department • Hearing Service Center • Highway City Community Development • Lowell Community Development Corporation • Marjaree Mason Center • Navigating Structures • Orange Center School District • Resources for Independence Central Valley • RH Community Builders • Sanger Unified School District • Transform Fresno • WestCare California, Inc. 1 Intercept Interviews A team of City staff conducted intercept interviews at Inspiration Park (5770 W. Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 9372) on a busy Saturday afternoon, November 2, 2019. The interviewers approached families and individuals as they were picnicking and enjoying the playground with a set of short, informal questions designed to engage residents informally about areas and issues they would like to see improved within the city. Participation varied, with some residents willing to speak at length and others more succinctly listing just a few issues for improvement. One common theme was an expression of appreciation for the City’s effort to be out on a Saturday to hear directly from residents. In all, 13 residents participated in an intercept interview. Project Website A standalone website specifically for the City’s Consolidated Plan and Analysis of Impediments project was developed and hosted at www.FresnoConPlanAI.com to be both an information resource for the community and to facilitate input and engagement. The project website was continually updated with meeting details, contained a link to the community survey, offered fact sheets on each of the City’s grant programs, and linked to HUD’s AFFH Mapping Tool so that residents could find and easily access the full set of HUD-provided data for analysis in the AI. The website received 994 visits from 818 unique users over the course of the project. Three comments were submitted for the project team’s consideration through an online comment form located on the website. 2 Community Survey A final method for obtaining community input was a 29-question survey available to the general public, including people living or working in the City of Fresno or other stakeholders. The survey was available online and in hard copy, in English, Spanish and Hmong, from October to December 2019. Paper copies were available at the public meetings and other related events held throughout the study area. A total of 500 survey responses were received, including four that were completed in Spanish (although 28% of the English version respondents indicated that they live in multi-lingual households). Public Comment Period and Hearing The City of Fresno will hold a public comment period to receive input on the draft Analysis of Impediments in Winter 2020. Further information about the comment period, including any public comments received, will be included here in the final draft of this document. Publicity for Community Engagement Activities The City of Fresno executed a robust community engagement strategy for this AI and the associated Consolidated Plan. The public meetings were all held at local schools, community centers, churches, and other venues across the city with a goal of making them more accessible to the public than traditional city government buildings. The initial slate of nine public meetings was advertised via a press release posted on the city’s website, through inserts in water bills mailed to all the City’s residential addresses, to families of school-aged children through Peachjar (a flyer distribution system used in multiple local school districts), and a public notice published in the Fresno Bee. The second round of public meetings held in December were advertised by volunteers who placed 10,000 door hangers at residences in southwest Fresno and the neighborhoods surrounding the three meeting locations. The third round of public feedback meetings held in January was similarly advertised through doorhangers and social media. Wherever practical, all meeting notices, flyers, doorhangers, and other promotional material contained information in English, Spanish, and Hmong. A project website built specifically for the City’s AI and Consolidated Plan project received 994 visits from 818 unique users over the course of the project. Community Engagement Results Listed below are the summarized comments from interviews, community meetings, and focus groups, as well as a summary of survey results. All input was considered in the development of this AI, and no comments or surveys were not accepted. Note that these comments do not necessarily reflect the views of the City of Fresno or Mosaic Community Planning. 3 Community Meetings and Focus Groups 1. What types of housing needs are greatest in Fresno? Are there parts of the city where the need is greater than others? Housing Development • Affordable housing. • Single-family homes. • Three- to four-bedroom units for larger-sized families, including larger-sized subsidized units. • Mixed income neighborhoods to allow opportunity for people at all income levels. • Infill. Developers are afraid of infill because you can still build outward or build in other counties. There needs to be a way for infill development to work out for private developers, e.g. tax abatements. • Multi-family housing. There is an unspoken policy that this means more multi-family will go south because the people in the Northeast and Northwest will not accept it. • Addressing NIMBYism, which stops a lot of projects. Homelessness and Homelessness Prevention • Assistance with barriers such as paying the security deposit, bad credit, inability to save first and last month’s rent. • Services and subsidized housing for people who are homeless. • Shelters that accommodate families. Currently, families have to be separated. Families end up staying in their vehicle to keep the family together. A lot of people live in a family member’s home or garage. • Homeless resources that are not located in the southernmost part of city with no resources – in a place where no one can see the homeless population. • A range of housing for the homeless, from emergency shelter to transitional housing to housing choice vouchers. • Housing earmarked for people who are homeless with a voucher. There is so much pressure on service providers to get them housed. • More emphasis on homelessness prevention and creative solutions to chronic homelessness rather than just moving people. Tiny homes, one stop shop with services and bathrooms, rental readiness screening, and public properties used as safe places for people sleeping in their cars. Accessible Housing • Affordable, accessible and integrated housing for people with disabilities. Integrated means living where you want to live. This includes inclusionary housing with larger units that accommodate children. A lot of new apartments are affordable but not accessible or integrated. • Financial assistance for home modifications to improve accessibility for people with disabilities, particularly in the 93722 ZIP code. Even a ramp can be costly and involve red tape. People end up having to move to somewhere they may not want to live. 4 • Safe and accessible housing for deaf people, including video phones and internet for video phones. For those who speak ASL, these features are needed for emergencies and for social purposes. Housing Improvements • Mobile home improvements, particularly accessibility accommodations, weatherization, and roof repairs for seniors. There is a tremendous need among seniors living in mobile home parks and Habitat for Humanity may be able to assist with roof repairs if they had more funding. • Home repair is needed throughout the city, including in North Fresno. Funding should be available to eligible households everywhere, particularly seniors. • Major need for housing rehab (roofs, windows, paint, etc.) and code enforcement in South Fresno. Homes there should be improved for South Fresno residents rather than building new housing that existing residents can’t afford. Code enforcement needs to be proactive rather than waiting for calls. Rental Assistance and Homebuyer Programs • First time homebuyer programs and assistance, particularly if you can combine local assistance with other downpayment assistance funds from the State. • An improved Section 8 voucher administration process. Landlords have to wait three months for the housing authority to do inspections, plus an additional 45 days before they can fill each unit. • Difficulty using Section 8 vouchers. Payment standards are lower than market rents, so voucher holders are unable to find somewhere to use their vouchers. • Covenants that keep housing at an affordable rate. 2. What parts of the city are generally seen as areas of opportunity (i.e. places people aspire to live, places that offer good access to schools, jobs, and other amenities)? What makes them attractive places to live? Are there barriers someone might face in moving to one of these areas? • North of Herndon. Bullard is in between. • Northern Fresno, if you have transportation. Without transportation, the area of opportunity might be downtown. • Woodward Park and Northeast Fresno, but it’s hard to move into these areas. There also may not be buses there. • Sunnyside, north of Shaw, has grocery stores and is on the bus line. • Tower district has cultural, arts, queer resources. • Kings Canyon and Cedar areas have government services. • Price and income are barriers. • Most areas with amenities are predominantly white and predominantly evangelical and conservative. They are not open to black people. People get mistreated when minorities move into white neighborhoods. 5 • Residents of high-income areas don’t want low- and moderate-income housing there. NIMBYism is an issue. • It isn’t that people are looking to move to areas of opportunity. They want to stay in their neighborhoods and have opportunity. • A neighborhood of choice is a place where you want to be, you have relationships, you have access to transportation, you can get to your child’s school. Sometimes we put that on an affluent neighborhood, but there is value in diverse communities. • When we put all senior, veterans or affordable housing in one area, we are not creating diverse communities. We are not creating places of opportunity when we are putting all resources in one area. • Neighborhoods are reliant on transportation. There is a disconnect in certain communities. If you can live in the north side, there is no Queen of Sierra Vista (MediCal provider). Buses out there only run once an hour. 3. Do residents of similar incomes generally have the same range of housing options? Are there any barriers other than income/savings that might impact housing choices? Are you aware of any housing discrimination? • People with poor credit scores pay additional fees or may not get housing. • Slumlords take advantage of people who are locked out of the system. A renter gets housing but has to do their own maintenance for fear that they would be evicted if they complained. • One apartment complex had no heat for a month in the winter. These were Southeast Asian folks who were older and vulnerable. • Latinos in central valley are scared to report things because of their citizenship status. • Apartment complexes are not providing accessible parking. • Disabled housing applicants place complaints about service dogs being considered pets. • Deaf clients use a payee service which pays rent on the 3rd of the month. If it arrives late, on 4th of 5th, they get a late fee. • Southwest Fresno (93706 zip code) has been redlined, leading to dilapidated properties. Underutilized property may be purchased by outside investors rather than being fixed up into housing for neighborhood residents. • Minimum rents create discrimination, even when people have Section 8 vouchers. • Housing access is based on income and what you can afford. • I am not aware of housing discrimination. 4. Are people in Fresno segregated in where they live? What causes this segregation to occur? • People with poor credit scores pay additional fees or may not get housing. • Slumlords take advantage of people who are locked out of the system. A renter gets housing but has to do their own maintenance for fear that they would be evicted if they complained. • One apartment complex had no heat for a month in the winter. These were Southeast Asian folks who were older and vulnerable. 6 • Latinos in central valley are scared to report things because of their citizenship status. • Apartment complexes are not providing accessible parking. • Disabled housing applicants place complaints about service dogs being considered pets. • Deaf clients use a payee service which pays rent on the 3rd of the month. If it arrives late, on 4th of 5th, they get a late fee. • Southwest Fresno (93706 zip code) has been redlined, leading to dilapidated properties. Underutilized property may be purchased by outside investors rather than being fixed up into housing for neighborhood residents. • Minimum rents create discrimination, even when people have Section 8 vouchers. • Housing access is based on income and what you can afford. • I am not aware of housing discrimination. 5. What types of fair housing services (education, complaint investigation, testing, etc.) are offered in the area? Who offers them? How well are they coordinated with the work of other organizations in the community? • Central California Legal Services (CCLS) provides some assistance and tenant advocacy. They are limited because they can only serve people who are legal citizens. They help if the landlord is not fixing things or if you are getting evicted. • CCLS coordinates better now. They joined the Continuum of Care and attend all the meetings. They are partnering to do a homeless prevention pilot project. • Tenants Together has not been staffed for the past few years. • Faith in the Valley highlights slumlords and work around the Rental Housing Improvement Act (RHIA). They organize around housing issues, but do not do direct services. • The California Apartment Association (CAA) has a class every year on fair housing. Large companies will send their employees. The CAA teaches landlords how to abide by the law, not to get around it. • HUD takes fair housing complaints but few people would know that process. • There is a gap in terms of direct service organizations, e.g. where to go to ask questions about lease, landlord-tenant questions. • I do not know. 6. Are public resources (e.g. parks, schools, roads, police & fire services, etc.) available evenly throughout all neighborhoods in the city? Do some areas get more/less than their share? • Basics like sidewalks and road conditions are not even throughout the city. For example, West Fresno has roads that are falling apart. Even if spending on these things is even now, conditions differ and improvements are needed in some areas more than others. • The further north you go, the faster and more present the services are, especially regarding law enforcement. The further south you go, the more acceptable criminal activity can be. 7 • Transportation should be improved, particularly with lower prices for seniors, people with disabilities, and people who are homeless. • Southwest Fresno has less resources or resources in worse shape than other parts of the city, and these gaps are a form of racism by the City. Schools are worse, Boys and Girls Club building is vacant, and the Maxie Park Community Center has not been kept up. The neighborhood is disheartened and wants to see its existing assets strengthened. • Grant funds are allocated for Southwest Fresno or based on its residents’ demographics, yet these funds may go to other parts of the city. For example, money that was to be spent in Southwest Fresno was almost used in downtown instead. • The City now has Go Fresno app where you can submit issues. You must have a phone, be tech savvy and speak English. So, it only serves a small population. • I have not heard that fire is an issue. • Since the “No Camping” ordinance, parks are getting more attention. It seems focused on cleanliness, but not on enforcing other laws. Stakeholder Interviews 1. What types of housing needs are greatest in Fresno? Are there parts of the city where the need is greater than others? • Affordable housing is needed, but the overarching issue is poverty, which often leads to high turnover. There’s a need to create as many long-term affordable units as possible, including through affordability covenants and increased density. • Homeownership assistance could help with stability, but for-sale inventory is generally low. • Affordable housing in areas with perceived safety. There is plenty of affordable housing in Fresno, but it’s located in an area where you wouldn’t want to raise a family due to gang activity and a lack of grocery store and other conveniences. Affordable units are needed is in Northwest and Northeast Fresno. • A greater mix of housing options. Fresno’s housing stock is mostly single-family detached and some multifamily. There are virtually no condos or townhomes for purchase, and no multifamily housing for moderate / middle income groups or in North Fresno. • Multifamily apartment communities, including studios. Developers will only build affordable multifamily non-senior units if required to do so. • Larger housing units for big families. • Affordable housing is needed throughout the city and a variety of price points reaching into moderate- and-middle income groups (retail workers, teachers, etc.) Housing Authority properties are usually completely pre-leased before they open, with long wait lists. • There are not mixed-income neighborhoods here. Most rentals are in Southwest and Southeast Fresno and are either Section 8 units or require significant repair. • Stakeholders’ thoughts on inclusionary zoning are mixed – some mention it as a mechanism to create more affordable housing, another identifies it as something that will perpetuate northern sprawl. 8 • Housing development has been a result of sprawl rather than intentional planning, with little vision or guiding policy at the City. Sprawl draws resources away from South and Central Fresno and to the north. • Section 8 buying power is lower than market rents, even though the Housing Authority recently revisited payment standards. Voucher holders have trouble finding units to rent. • Transit oriented housing development, although marketability and return on investment may not support it, and affordable housing along transit corridors. • Rehabilitation and addressing blight, including code enforcement of rental properties. In Southwest and Central Fresno, rents are escalating • Bridge housing and rapid rehousing with transition to permanent supportive housing. Diversion and early intervention are key in preventing or limiting homelessness. A lot of housing programs just give housing but no support services. • Emergency solutions, homeless housing and shelters. Re-entry assistance – housing is hard to get in to and people may not be familiar with processes for apply for affordable housing. • There is no group in the community focusing on homeless families rather than single people. • Housing for people with developmental disabilities. Affordability, safety, and landlords who understand their clients are important. Difficulty obtaining housing and evictions are common. • Elderly housing. 2. What parts of the city are generally seen as areas of opportunity (i.e. places people aspire to live, places that offer good access to schools, jobs, and other amenities)? What makes them attractive places to live? Are there barriers someone might face in moving to one of these areas? • Northeast and Northwest Fresno have good schools and beautiful parks. Cost, transportation, and lack of multifamily and smaller housing units are barriers to moving there. Also, people may want to stay in places where they have neighborhood ties rather than move. Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) attitudes are barriers to multifamily development there. • North Fresno and Downtown offer good access to jobs. • Schools district with better test scores (e.g. Clovis, Central, Sanger). • North of Herndon Avenue or north of Shaw Avenue. There is a lack of more affordable housing in those areas, for example housing without government subsidy. Homes are $400,000 - $1 million compared to south Fresno where homes cost $150,000. Rent is $900 in south Fresno vs. $1800 in north Fresno. Transportation could also be a barrier; the area is very auto-oriented. • Tower District. • There are condos in Pinedale, but this is also an area with a higher crime rate. • South Fresno has good transportation to take people from home to work or shopping. • Southeast Fresno, because people are seeing how this area is developing. Affordability would be a barrier. Homes are starting at $300,000. There are no rental 9 units unless people are renting their homes. The accessibility is there because of highway. • Hmong community wants to live near their relatives. Family support – babysitters, drop off kids for a few hours. Families are clustered, because families look to each other for resources. • For people with developmental disabilities, safety is a key factor and varies from neighborhood to neighborhood even within the same area of the city. West Fresno has some nice spots. • Availability and affordability of accessible housing is a potential barrier for people with disabilities, regardless of area within the city. 3. Do residents of similar incomes generally have the same range of housing options? Are there any barriers other than income/savings that might impact housing choices? Are you aware of any housing discrimination? • Housing options are not the same due to differences in assets. African American families often have fewer assets than white families and could have more difficulty obtaining housing. • Housing discrimination probably happens based on stereotypes and landlords’ personal biases. People of different races and ethnicities would have different experiences looking for housing. • Housing discrimination probably happens, particularly to immigrants and people who are undocumented. There might be substandard housing that people put up with due to their immigration status. • Landlords may discriminate based on earnings. Households receiving public assistance may have their options limited because of landlords being unwilling to accept their applications. • Income is the biggest driving force in housing access and minorities are generally the poorest population groups in Fresno. They live predominately in South Fresno. • Discrimination is everywhere. Recent law around Section 8 will address landlord refusal to take vouchers. • Housing discrimination happens against the LGBTQ community. • Renters may experience discrimination based on family status, particularly large families. • For homeowners, households with the same means will have the same options; however, they may have different preferences in where to live. • Barriers to obtaining housing include: o Bad credit or no credit. There are a lot of unbanked people with no credit history. o Eviction history. o Race. o Immigrant status. Fresno has a lot of migrant farm workers, who may have more difficulty purchasing a home. o Language barriers, especially for Hmong families. Some places where Hmong live are poorly managed and in bad condition, but residents can’t 10 advocate or voice problems to their landlords, so management does not respond to their needs. 4. Are people in Fresno segregated in where they live? What causes this segregation to occur? • Yes, Fresno is segregated by income/affordability and race. • Yes, Fresno is segregated but similarly to any city in the US. • Yes, if you look at a map you see that the city is segregated, with white residents living predominately in North and Northwest Fresno. • California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) Opportunity Maps show that there are areas of the region that are more segregated than others. • Yes, the Black community is definitely segregated. • Yes, Southeast Fresno has a large Hispanic population, West Fresno has a large Black population, North Fresno and Clovis has a large white population, north and west of Highway 99 there are higher share of Sikh population, and Central Fresno has a mix of residents. • There is a larger Hmong population in SE Fresno. It could be due to where people were limited to purchasing. There are also populations living near their farms. SE Fresno is 20% Asian. • Large Indian population in West Fresno. Not only is there a lack of affordable housing in affluent areas, but there is also a lack of housing so that people can move up within their communities. • Tower District and Central Fresno may have a mix of residents, but overall, segregation is pretty clear on a census tract level. • There are concentrations of certain ethnicities throughout the city. Near parks that have cricket, most of residents are Sikh. • People with disabilities are segregated based on where they are able to find housing. • Poor residents live south, rich residents move further north. • The city is not segregated and talking about it as such amplifies the problem. • There is some racism in Fresno, but it’s not the biggest problem. • Causes of segregation: o Redlining early in Fresno’s history, particularly in Southeast Fresno. o NIMBYism. o Public housing locations – in southeast Fresno, there is public housing but not up north. o Near Fresno State, the area was more established and wealthier, but people who could afford to leave moved north. o The wealthy moved north up Van Ness over time and out to the bluffs. o The northside advocated for the highway not to be built in their area. This pushed the community apart based on the design. o Segregation persists because the poor cannot afford Clovis. People are poor because they aren’t working – and there are jobs out there. o There was a Hmong leader that came – Vang Pao – and people followed him here. 11 5. What types of fair housing services (education, complaint investigation, testing, etc.) are offered in the area? Who offers them? How well are they coordinated with the work of other organizations in the community? • Central California Legal Services was most commonly cited by interviewees. One person noted that CCLS coordinates well with other local agencies but could use additional support. • Other agencies identified by interviewees include: o California Rural Legal Services o Fair Housing Council o Fresno Housing Authority o City of Fresno o Social justice advocacy law group o Tenants’ rights groups o Building Health Communities may offer workshops o California Apartment Association • Central Valley Regional Center advocates for clients with developmental disabilities and consults with attorneys regularly on legal issues. • The efficacy of the Fair Housing Council should be reviewed. The City has funded them for decades – what is it getting? • Even though there are fair housing resources here, the general public may not have much awareness about them. • Fair housing information needs to be disseminated through schools, churches, and in multiple languages. • A few interviewees did not know of any fair housing resources in Fresno. 6. Are public resources (e.g. parks, schools, roads, police & fire services, etc.) available evenly throughout all neighborhoods in the city? Do some areas get more/less than their share? Parks • Park quality varies. Southwest Fresno parks have older equipment and less maintenance, but possibly more programming. • There is only one community center off of Blackstone. • Look at differences in park space north and south of Herndon – it’s not equitable at all. There are more parks in some districts than others. • Southwest Fresno has lots of heavy truck traffic and no parks. • The City tries to invest equitably. New neighborhoods have parks because they were planned that way; to increase the number of parks in older neighborhoods that were built without them, you’d have to tear down houses. Poor planning in the past leads to inequities. Schools • There is an earnest effort to provide quality schools throughout the city, although student achievement is not the same citywide. 12 • There are significant differences in schools between North and South Fresno (or between Clovis and Fresno school districts). Tax dollars from North Fresno should be used to improve South Fresno schools. Fire and Police • Police resources are allocated based on data; fire department resources are designed to serve all parts of the city equally. • Core of city is well represented with police but may not be as good on the edge. • There are some challenges with fire services. They need a fire station on the outlying areas that are converting from rural to urban. Transportation and Lighting • Bike lanes, trails and sidewalks are more present in newer areas. • Street lighting is more prominent in newer areas. • Street conditions (medians, paving, sidewalks, landscaping) vary considerably by neighborhood, with North Fresno generally being in better condition than South Fresno. • Public transit service is concentrated in South Fresno with less accessibility in the north; this creates a disconnect. • There is industry in the south, but no bus transportation. Those jobs are only for people with cars. General Comments • Yes, the city does a good job of spreading resources out to its districts. • Historically, the City has focused investment on the north side at the expense of the south side. The current administration is trying to right those past wrongs. • South Fresno has many resources/services, which may be difficult to access if you don’t live there. • The differences between the north and south sides of the city have less to do with infrastructure and more to do with economic development. Higher incomes in the north attract more businesses. • Higher income areas are newer and better built compared to older, more deteriorated areas. • Areas with a greater tax base generally have better infrastructure. This is visible just driving from North to South Fresno. 7. Is there anything we haven’t discussed that you feel is important to our research? • Reach out to those who have no voice. Everyone contributes equally to Fresno. The city is very diverse, and that needs to be embraced. The GoFresno app should be marketed more evenly. • Landlords have a lot of political muscle in Fresno and no one wants to do anything to upset them. Eviction is part of their business model. • Residents need to better understand why the community should work to end homelessness. There is no organization focused on communicating this. 13 • Different residential models should be explored to improve housing affordability and homeownership access – land trusts, first time homebuyers programs, rent control, partnership with the Housing Authority. • Fresno is always chasing a big new project that will never come to be. Why not set more realistic goals? A small pocket park could be built easily and inexpensively. 14 Community Survey The community survey queried residents and other stakeholders regarding needs related to housing, homelessness, economic/community development, public infrastructure, public facilities, and public services. Respondent Demographics • 92% of respondents lived in the City of Fresno. • Residents from 26 zip codes across the region participated in the survey. All City of Fresno zip codes were represented among the respondents, with the largest numbers of respondents coming from the 93702 (Roosevelt High School vicinity), 93727 (Las Palmas/Sunnyside), 93704 (Maroa Avenue corridor from Herndon to McKinley), and 93726 (Einstein Park area, south of Fresno State) ZIP codes. • Survey participants were predominantly white (44%) and Hispanic (33%) but reflected all racial and ethnic backgrounds in the city. • Survey respondents represented all age groups and income levels • Over one quarter of all survey participants lived in households that were bilingual or included a resident with a disability. • Nearly half of all survey respondents were homeowners (46%), while 42% were renters. • Eleven percent of respondents lived in publicly supported housing. FIGURE 2. AGE GROUP AND ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME OF SURVEY RESPONDENTS 18-24 11% 25-34 22% 35-44 22% 45-54 19% 55-61 10% 62-74 13% 75+ 3% Which is your age group? 73 53 69 57 81 106 $100,000 and above $75,000 to $99,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $25,000 to $34,999 Less than $25,000 0 50 100 150 Number of Participants What is your total annual household income? 15 Fair Housing in Fresno • A majority of Fresno’s survey participants report knowing or somewhat knowing their fair housing rights (63% and 30%, respectively). While only 7% of respondents do not know their fair housing rights, 38% of respondents would not know where to file a fair housing complaint. • Ninety-one (91) survey participants experienced housing discrimination while living in Fresno. Most of these participants (79%) stated that they were discriminated against by a landlord or property manager. Race, ethnicity and familial status were the most common bases for discrimination. • Of the 91 respondents who experienced housing discrimination, only 17 filed a report. The most common reasons for not reporting discrimination were (1) not knowing what good it would do, (2) fear of retaliation, and (3) not knowing where to file. • Survey participants also expressed that community resources such as roads, sidewalks, parks, grocery stores, buses, banks, schools and general property maintenance were not provided equally nor maintained equally throughout all neighborhoods in the city. FIGURE 3. AVAILABILITY AND MAINTENANCE OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES IN FRESNO FROM THE COMMUNITY SURVEY • Survey participants were asked whether they thought housing discrimination was an issue in Fresno. One-half of all participants believed housing discrimination was an issue. 134 109 75 99 100 56 56 94 147 52 107 117 50 56 181 188 216 235 232 272 241 251 169 308 201 171 282 285 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Schools Bus Service Roads and Sidewalks Grocery stores and other shopping Banking and lending Parks and trails Property maintenanceNumber of Survey Responses Thinking about community resources in Fresno, please check whether you think each of the following are equally available and maintained in all neighborhoods. Equally provided Equally maintained Not equally provided Not equally maintained 16 FIGURE 4. HOUSING DISCRIMINATION IN FRESNO FROM THE COMMUNITY SURVEY • Asked to select any factors that are barriers to fair housing in Fresno, respondents most commonly identified the following: o Not enough affordable housing for individuals o Not enough affordable housing for families o Neighborhoods that need revitalization and new investment o Not enough affordable housing for seniors [CATEGORY NAME] [PERCENTAGE] No 13% [CATEGORY NAME] [PERCENTAGE] [CATEGORY NAME] [PERCENTAGE] Do you believe housing discrimination is an issue in Fresno? 17 FIGURE 5. FAIR HOUSING BARRIERS IN FRESNO 150 152 161 162 180 207 231 246 250 258 276 281 282 307 321 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Limited access to banking and financial services Discrimination or steering by real estate agents Discrimination by mortgage lenders Limited access to community resources for people with disabilities Limited access to good schools Lack of housing options for people with disabilities Limited access to jobs Landlords refusing to accept rental assistance Community opposition to affordable housing Discrimination by landlords or rental agents Displacement of residents due to rising housing costs Not enough affordable housing for seniors Neighborhoods that need revitalization and new investment Not enough affordable housing for families Not enough affordable housing for individuals Number of Survey Respondents Fair Housing Barrier CHAPTER 3. SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE Demographic Profile Fresno’s population is estimated at 510,450 according to the 2011-2015 5-Year American Community Survey. Between 2009 and 2015, the population increased by 9%, up from 467,089 in 2009. Race and Ethnicity Fresno’s Hispanic population constitutes nearly half of all residents (46.7%) and has grown significantly since the 1990 Census, where the Hispanic population only made up around 30% of the population. In real numbers, the Hispanic population increased from 107,403 people to 231,855 over the 20-year timeframe, a 115.9% increase. Conversely, the percentage of the city’s white population has decreased over the same period, from 184,346 people (50.6% of the city) in 1990 to 152,909 (30.8%) in 2010. Asian or Pacific Islanders comprise Fresno’s third largest population segment, making up 12.1% of the city, roughly similar to their 1990 population share of 11.4%. From 1990 to 2010, Fresno gained an additional 18,500 Asian or Pacific Islander residents, an increase of 44.2%. Black residents (36,724 people or 7.4% of Fresno’s population) and Native American residents (3,157 people or 0.6%) saw no change in population share since 1990. These segments added 9,600 and 517 residents since, respectively, since 1990. Trends in the Fresno region (defined by HUD as Fresno County for the purpose of this AI) are similar to those in the City of Fresno. Between 1990 and 2010, the Hispanic population grew to over half of the population (50.3% or 468,070 residents), up from 35.4% (236,234 residents) in 1990. Comparatively, the white population decreased from 50.7% (338,298 residents) to 32.7% (304,522 residents) over the same period. The Fresno region gained 40,000 Asian residents, nearly 19,000 Black residents, and nearly 6,000 Native American residents; however, these groups make up a smaller share of the region than in the City of Fresno. The region’s 87,922 Asian or Pacific Islander residents make up 9.5% of the region (compared to 12.1% of the city). The region’s 45,005 Black residents make up 4.8% of the region, compared to 7.4% of the city. National Origin The City of Fresno’s foreign-born residents make up 20.5% of the city’s population (101,517 residents). This number represents an increase from 60,988 foreign-born residents in 1990, which made up 16.7% of the population. The city’s increase in foreign-born residents parallels the rate of foreign-born residents in the region, where 21.2% are foreign born compared to 17.8% in 1990. The top three countries of origin in both the city and the Fresno region are Mexico, Laos and India. Residents born in Mexico make up 64% of all foreign-born Fresno (city) HISPANIC RESIDENTS MAKE UP THE LARGEST SHARE OF FRESNO’S POPULATION, GROWING FROM UNDER 30% IN 1990 TO NEARLY 50% TODAY. 19 residents. Residents from Laos make up another 11% of the city’s foreign-born population, while residents from India make up 7%. Other significant countries of origin include Thailand, the Philippines, Cambodia, El Salvador, Vietnam, Korea and China (excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan). Limited English Proficiency The limited English proficiency (LEP) population makes up approximately one-sixth of Fresno residents (79,621 residents). While the number of LEP residents increased overall from 1990 to 2010, in the year 2000 the city had a higher percentage of residents with limited English proficiency (17.6%) than in 2010. The greater Fresno region also experienced growth in the LEP population, increasing from 109,640 in 1990 (16.4% of the population) to 157,195 in 2010 (or 16.9% of the population). The top languages spoken by the LEP population include Spanish, Hmong, Other Indic languages, and Laotian. Spanish-speaking LEP residents comprise 70% of the LEP population. Hmong-speaking LEP residents make up 12% of the LEP population, with all other languages accounting for no more than 4% of the LEP population. Disability According to 2011-2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates, 13% of Fresno’s population has a disability. The most common disability type in the city is an ambulatory difficulty, which affects 7.1% of the population. Cognitive and independent living difficulties are the next most prevalent, affecting 5.8% and 5.4% of the population. Smaller percentages of the population are affected by hearing difficulties (3.7%), vision difficulties (3.2%), and self-care difficulties (3.0%). The distribution pattern by disability type in the city is similar to that of the region, with ambulatory difficulties being the most prevalent disability type (affecting 6.7% of the regional population). Age The age distribution in Fresno reflects an aging of the population from 1990 to present. During this period, the share of the population under 18 decreased to 29.9%, down from 31.4% in 1990 and 33.4% in 2000. Conversely, the share of adults aged 18-64 grew from 58.4% in 1990 (and 57.1% in 2000) to 60.5% by 2010. The share of seniors declined slightly, from 10.2% in 1990 to 9.7% in 2010. The Fresno region experienced a nearly identical pattern, with a greater share of adults aged 18-64, a smaller share of children and a slightly declining share of seniors since 1990. Sex Gender distribution in Fresno has shifted between 1990 and 2010 to reflect a smaller female to male ratio over time. The male population increased to 49.2% in 2010 from 48.6% in 1990. Fresno’s female population decreased from 51.4% in 1990 to 50.8% in 2010. Gender distribution in the region is evenly split between male and female (each at 50%) in 2010. Family Type 20 Families with children account for 53.0% of all families residing in Fresno. Although the city added over 10,000 families with children by 2010 (climbing to 59,626 households), the overall share of families with children declined by 2.3 percentage points between the period of 1990 to 2010. A similar decline occurred at the regional level, where families with children decreased from 54.6% of households in 1990 to 52.3% in 2010, despite gaining over 20,000 additional families with children. These shifts represent a decrease in the percentage of families with children in combination with an increase in the number of families overall. 21 TABLE 1. DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW Demographic Indicator City of Fresno Fresno Region # % # % Race/Ethnicity Non-Hispanic White 152,909 30.8% 304,522 32.7% Black 36,724 7.4% 45,005 4.8% Asian or Pacific Islander 60,180 12.1% 87,922 9.5% Native American 3,157 0.6% 5,979 0.6% Two or More Races 10,328 0.6% 17,208 0.6% Other 960 0.2% 1,744 0.2% Hispanic 231,855 46.7% 468,070 50.3% National Origin #1 country of origin Mexico 57,562 12.6% Mexico 131,346 15.3% #2 country of origin Laos 9,625 2.1% Laos 11,420 1.3% #3 country of origin India 6,630 1.5% India 11,270 1.3% #4 country of origin Thailand 4,498 1.0% Philippines 6,293 0.7% #5 country of origin Philippines 3,925 0.9% El Salvador 5,768 0.7% #6 country of origin Cambodia 1,730 0.4% Thailand 5,490 0.6% #7 country of origin El Salvador 1,726 0.4% Vietnam 2,553 0.3% #8 country of origin Vietnam 1,661 0.4% China* 2,195 0.3% #9 country of origin Korea 1,290 0.3% Cambodia 2,160 0.3% #10 country of origin China* 1,264 0.3% Korea 1,890 0.2% Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Language #1 LEP Language Spanish 55,085 12.1% Spanish 129,262 15.0% #2 LEP Language Hmong 9,124 2.0% Hmong 10,918 1.3% #3 LEP Language Other Indic language 3,522 0.8% Other Indic language 5,906 0.7% #4 LEP Language Laotian 3,094 0.7% Laotian 3,399 0.4% * Excluding Hong Kong and Taiwan. 22 TABLE 1. DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW (CONTINUED) Demographic Indicator City of Fresno Fresno Region # % # % Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Language (continued) #5 LEP Language Cambodian 1,720 0.4% Chinese 2,666 0.3% #6 LEP Language Chinese 1,668 0.4% Cambodian 2,086 0.2% #7 LEP Language Armenian 1,099 0.2% Vietnamese 1,789 0.2% #8 LEP Language Vietnamese 1,097 0.2% Tagalog 1,439 0.2% #9 LEP Language Tagalog 944 0.2% Armenian 1,408 0.2% #10 LEP Language Arabic 930 0.2% Arabic 1,312 0.2% Disability Type Hearing difficulty 16,712 3.7% 31,270 3.7% Vision difficulty 14,563 3.2% 23,661 2.8% Cognitive difficulty 26,383 5.8% 42,299 5.0% Ambulatory difficulty 16,712 7.1% 57,130 6.7% Self-care difficulty 13,707 3.0% 23,733 2.8% Independent living difficulty 24,354 5.4% 41,042 4.8% Sex Male 244,275 49.2% 464,811 50.0% Female 251,838 50.8% 465,639 50.0% Age Under 18 148,098 29.9% 277,507 29.8% 18-64 300,017 60.5% 559,522 60.1% 65+ 47,998 9.7% 93,421 10.0% Family Type Families with children 59,626 53.0% 112,139 52.3% Note: All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region, except family type, which is out of total families. The most populous places of birth and languages at the city and county levels may not be the same and are thus labeled separately. 23 TABLE 2. DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS Demographic Indicator 1990 2000 2010 # % # % # % City of Fresno Race/Ethnicity White, Non-Hispanic 184,346 50.6% 167,709 38.4% 152,909 30.8% Black, Non-Hispanic 27,124 7.4% 36,168 8.3% 40,297 8.1% Hispanic 107,403 29.5% 172,038 39.4% 231,855 46.7% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 41,733 11.4% 51,931 11.9% 64,252 13.0% Native American, Non-Hispanic 2,640 0.7% 5,843 1.3% 5,523 1.1% National Origin Foreign-born 60,988 16.7% 87,136 19.9% 101,517 20.5% Limited English Proficiency Limited English proficiency 55,137 15.1% 76,847 17.6% 79,621 16.1% Sex Male 177,080 48.6% 214,312 49.0% 244,275 49.2% Female 187,614 51.4% 223,089 51.0% 251,838 50.8% Age Under 18 114,587 31.4% 146,024 33.4% 148,098 29.9% 18-64 212,824 58.4% 249,736 57.1% 300,017 60.5% 65+ 37,284 10.2% 41,641 9.5% 47,998 9.7% Family Type Families with children 48,789 55.3% 44,690 56.4% 59,626 53.0% Fresno Region Race/Ethnicity White, Non-Hispanic 338,298 50.7% 317,277 39.7% 304,522 32.7% Black, Non-Hispanic 31,207 4.7% 43,399 5.4% 50,062 5.4% Hispanic 236,234 35.4% 351,211 44.0% 468,070 50.3% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 54,014 8.1% 70,140 8.8% 94,855 10.2% Native American, Non-Hispanic 4,979 0.8% 10,682 1.3% 10,612 1.1% National Origin Foreign-born 118,908 17.8% 168,501 21.1% 197,495 21.2% Limited English Proficiency Limited English proficiency 109,640 16.4% 151,468 19.0% 157,195 16.9% Sex Male 329,274 49.4% 398,846 49.9% 464,811 50.0% Female 337,722 50.6% 399,956 50.1% 465,639 50.0% 24 TABLE 2. DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS (CONTINUED) Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty This study uses a methodology developed by HUD that combines demographic and economic indicators to identify racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (RECAPs). These areas are defined as census tracts that have an individual poverty rate of 40% or more (or an individual poverty rate that is at least 3 times that of the tract average for the metropolitan area, whichever is lower) and a non-white population of 50% or more. Using a metric that combines demographic and economic indicators helps to identify a jurisdictions’ most vulnerable communities. The racial and ethnic composition of neighborhoods with concentrations of poverty is disproportionate relative to the U.S. population overall. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Black and Hispanic populations comprise nearly 80% of the population living in areas of concentrated poverty in metropolitan areas, but only account for 42.6% of the total poverty population in the U.S.4 Overrepresentation of these groups in areas of concentrated poverty can exacerbate disparities related to safety, employment, access to jobs and quality education, and conditions that lead to poor health. Identification of RECAPs is significant in determining priority areas for reinvestment and services to ameliorate conditions that negatively impact RECAP residents and the larger region. Since 2000, the prevalence of concentrated poverty has expanded by nearly 75% in both 4 United States, Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. “Overview of Community Characteristics in Areas with Concentrated Poverty.” ASPE Issue Brief, May 2014, https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/pdf/40651/rb_concentratedpoverty.pdf. Demographic Indicator 1990 2000 2010 # % # % # % Fresno Region (continued) Age Under 18 208,942 31.3% 262,604 32.9% 277,507 29.8% 18-64 389,781 58.4% 457,232 57.2% 559,522 60.1% 65+ 68,273 10.2% 78,965 9.9% 93,421 10.0% Family Type Families with children 89,339 54.6% 79,423 55.8% 112,139 52.3% Note: All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region for that year, except family type, which is out of total families. Data Sources: Decennial Census; ACS 25 population and number of neighborhoods. The majority of concentration of poverty is within the largest metro areas, but suburban regions have experienced the fastest growth rate.5 There are currently 40 census tracts that are designated as RECAPs in the City of Fresno, a significant increase from the 26 RECAPs in 2000 and 16 in 1990. RECAP census tracts cover all downtown neighborhoods, such as Jane Addams, Edison, Lowell, and Jefferson, as well as west and south Fresno. There are also two RECAP census tracts in the Bullard neighborhood of northern Fresno, in or near the campus of Fresno State University. A third isolated RECAP in the Bullard neighborhood is located around Yosemite Freeway, between Bullard and Shaw Avenues. Approximately 32% of Fresnans (157,749 residents) live in RECAPS census tracts. Hispanic residents make up approximately 63% of the population living in RECAP tracts. White residents make up 14% of RECAP tract residents, followed by Asian residents (12%), Black residents (9.2%) and Native American and Other Non-Hispanic residents at less than 1%. Comparatively, the Hispanic share of RECAP tract residents is slightly higher in the region (68%) with all other groups making up smaller shares than in the city. The foreign-born population living in RECAP census tracts primarily originates from Mexico, with 20% (or 32,051) of the city’s RECAP census tract residents being born in that country. Similarly, 23.4% of all RECAP tract residents in the Fresno region were born in Mexico. Both the city and region also have a significant number of RECAP residents born in Laos (2.8% and 2.3% respectively). The third most common country of origin for RECAP tract residents in the city is Thailand, which makes up 1.5% of all RECAP residents. The third most common country of origin in the region is El Salvador, which is the birthplace of 1.3% of all RECAP residents. Looking at familial status, 61% of the families living in Fresno’s RECAP tracts have children. Sixty-one percent of families in the region’s RECAP tracts are also families with children. These figures indicate that the percentage of families with children is greater in RECAP areas than throughout the city and county in general, where the share of families with children is between 52-53%. 5 Kneebone, Elizabeth. "The Growth and Spread of Concentrated Poverty, 2000 to 2008-2012." The Brookings Institution, 29 July 2016, www.brookings.edu/interactives/the-growth-and-spread-of-concentrated-poverty-2000-to- 2008-2012/. 26 FIGURE 6. RACIALLY/ ETHNICALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS OF POVERTY, CITY OF FRESNO FIGURE 7. RACIALLY/ ETHNICALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS OF POVERTY AND RACE AND ETHNICITY, CITY OF FRESNO, 2010 27 28 TABLE 3. RACIALLY AND ETHNICALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS OF POVERTY Demographic Indicator City of Fresno RECAP Tracts Fresno Region RECAP Tracts # % # % Race/Ethnicity Total Population in RECAPs 157,749 - 204,786 - White, Non-Hispanic 21,555 13.7% 25,230 12.3% Black or African American, Non- Hispanic 14,527 9.2% 15,117 7.4% Hispanic 99,041 62.8% 139,825 68.3% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 18,960 12.0% 20,412 10.0% Native American, Non-Hispanic 1,073 0.7% 1,258 0.6% Other, Non-Hispanic 246 0.2% 321 0.2% National Origin Total Population in RECAPs 157,749 - 204,786 - #1 country of origin Mexico 32,051 20.3% Mexico 47,825 23.4% #2 country of origin Laos 4,435 2.8% Laos 4,661 2.3% #3 country of origin Thailand 2,313 1.5% El Salvador 2,613 1.3% Family Type Total Families in RECAPs 31,269 - 40,948 - Families with Children 19,069 61.0% 25,149 61.4% Data Sources: Decennial Census; ACS 29 CHAPTER 4. SEGREGATION AND INTEGRATION Communities experience varying levels of segregation between different racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups. High levels of residential segregation often lead to conditions that exacerbate inequalities among population groups within a community. Increased concentrations of poverty and unequal access to jobs, education, and other services are some of the consequences of high residential segregation.6 Federal housing policies and discriminatory mortgage lending practices prior to the Fair Housing Act of 1968 not only encouraged segregation, but mandated restrictions based on race in specific neighborhoods. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 outlawed discriminatory housing practices but did little to address the existing segregation and inequalities. The federal government implemented other housing policies and programs, such as Section 8 and HOPE VI, in an effort to ameliorate the negative effects of residential segregation and reduce concentrations of poverty. Despite these efforts, the repercussions of the discriminatory policies and practices continue to have a significant impact on residential patterns today. Race and Ethnicity While Fresno’s population is relatively evenly distributed throughout the city, the spatial distribution of the population indicates considerable levels of segregation by race and ethnicity. Maps of the city’s population by race and ethnicity indicate clustering of white, non-Hispanic residents in north Fresno and of Hispanic residents in the southern portion of the city. Populations of other races and ethnicities, including Black and Asian or Pacific Islander residents (non-Hispanic) are relatively evenly distributed throughout the city (see Figure 8). Shifts in residential patterns of racial and ethnic groups since 1990 have resulted in a more diverse population in Fresno, but the city remains segregated by race and ethnicity. Figures 7 through 9 show an increase in the overall population -- and non-white populations in particular – between 1990 and 2010. Although it is difficult to determine exact correlation between density and segregation levels from the spatial data provided, segregation among racial and ethnic groups decreased slightly as density increased in the city between 1990 and 2010 (see Figures 8-10). 6 Massey, D. (1990). American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. American Journal of Sociology, 96(2), 329-357. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2781105 RACIAL AND ETHNIC SEGREGATION LEVELS IN FRESNO ARE CLASSIFIED AS LOW TO MODERATE AND HAVE BEEN DECLINING SINCE THE 1990S. 30 FIGURE 8. POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO, 2010 31 FIGURE 9. POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO, 2000 32 FIGURE 10. POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO, 1990 33 FIGURE 11. POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE FRESNO REGION, 2010 34 FIGURE 12. POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE FRESNO REGION, 2000 35 FIGURE 13. POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE FRESNO REGION, 1990 36 Segregation Levels In addition to visualizing the racial and ethnic composition of the area with the preceding maps, this study also uses a statistical analysis – referred to as dissimilarity – to evaluate how residential patterns vary by race and ethnicity, and how these patterns have changed since 1990. The Dissimilarity Index (DI) indicates the degree to two groups living in a region are similarly geographically distributed. Segregation is lowest when the geographic patterns of each group are the same. For example, segregation between two groups in a city or county is minimized when the population distribution by census tract of the first group matches that of the second. Segregation is highest when no members of the two groups occupy a common census tract. The proportion of the minority population group can be small and still not segregated if evenly spread among tracts or block groups. Evenness is not measured in an absolute sense but is scaled relative to the other group. Dissimilarity Index values range from 0 (complete integration) to 100 (complete segregation). HUD identifies a DI value below 40 as low segregation, a value between 40 and 54 as moderate segregation, and a value of 55 or higher as high segregation. When calculated from population data broken down by race or ethnicity, the DI represents the proportion of one group that would have to change their area of residence to match the distribution of the other. Table 4 shares the dissimilarity indices for four pairings, presenting values for 1990, 2000, and 2010, all calculated using census tracts as the area of measurement. The 2010 dissimilarity indices calculated for each pairing show low to moderate levels of segregation in the city of Fresno. The highest DI value of 42.0 was calculated for the Hispanic/white pairing, a slight decrease from moderate-level values calculated for 1990 and 2000. The Hispanic and white populations are also the most visibly segregated in Figures 8 through 10 in the previous section. The Asian or Pacific Islander/white pairing resulted in the lowest DI value of 35.8, indicating low levels of segregation among these populations. Between 1990 and 2010, DI values for all pairings decreased, with the Asian or Pacific Islander/white and Black/white pairings experiencing the greatest decreases. Only slight decreases in segregation levels occurred among the Hispanic and white populations during the same time period. The maps in the previous section show that the white population is clustered in north Fresno, while the city’s Hispanic population resides predominantly in south and west Fresno. As meeting attendees, survey respondents, and stakeholders interviewed in the course of this planning process noted that south and west Fresno have greater needs for public facilities and improvements compared to other areas of the city, the clustering of the Hispanic population in these areas may present fair housing concerns regarding disparities in access to opportunity by race and ethnicity. DI values in the Fresno region are higher compared to those in the city of Fresno for all pairings except for the Asian or Pacific Islander/ white pairing. In the region, DI values for non-white/ white, Black/white, and Hispanic/white pairings fall above the threshold for moderate segregation, while the Asian or Pacific Islander/ white pairing falls under the threshold for low segregation. The Black/white pairing has the highest DI of 49.5, and the Asian or Pacific 37 Islander/white pairing has the lowest DI of 35.3. Segregation levels have decreased for pairings in the region since 1990. TABLE 4. RACIAL AND ETHNIC DISSIMILARITY TRENDS National Origin and Limited English Proficiency Population Settlement patterns of immigrants significantly impact the composition and landscape of communities across the United States. Large central cities have the largest population of foreign-born residents, but suburban areas are experiencing rapid growth of foreign-born populations recently.7 Clusters of immigrants of the same ethnicity form for a variety of reasons. Social capital in the form of kinship ties, social network connections, and shared cultural experiences often draw new immigrants to existing communities. Settling in neighborhoods with an abundance of social capital is less financially burdensome for immigrants and provides opportunities to accumulate financial capital through employment and other resources that would otherwise be unattainable.8 Populations with limited English proficiency (LEP) are typically composed of foreign-born residents that originate from countries where English is not the primary language, however, a substantial portion (19%) of the national LEP population is born in the United States. Nationally, the LEP population has lower levels of education and is more likely to live in poverty compared to the English proficient population.9 Recent studies have also found that areas with high concentrations of LEP residents have lower rates of homeownership.10 7 James, F., Romine, J., & Zwanzig, P. (1998). The Effects of Immigration on Urban Communities. Cityscape, 3(3), 171-192. 8 Massey, D. (1999). Why Does Immigration Occur?: A Theoretical Synthesis. In Hirschman C., Kasinitz P., & DeWind J. (Eds.), Handbook of International Migration, The: The American Experience (pp. 34-52). Russell Sage Foundation. 9 Zong, J. & Batalova, J. (2015). “The Limited English Proficient Population in the United States” Migration Information Source. Retrieved: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/limited-english-proficient-population-united- states 10 Golding, E., Goodman, L., & Strochack, S. (2018). “Is Limited English Proficiency a Barrier to Homeownership.” Urban Institute. Retrieved: https://www.urban.org/research/publication/limited-english-proficiency-barrier- homeownership Race/Ethnicity City of Fresno Fresno Region 1990 2000 2010 1990 2000 2010 Non-White/White 43.9 39.7 38.8 44.5 42.7 41.7 Black/White 52.1 42.4 41.3 52.6 51.7 49.5 Hispanic/White 43.2 42.3 42.0 47.8 46.9 46.5 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 48.9 36.9 35.8 43.5 36.1 35.3 Data Sources: Decennial Census 38 Communities of people sharing the same ethnicity and informal networks are able to provide some resources and opportunities, but numerous barriers and limited financial capital influence residential patterns of foreign-born and LEP populations. Residential patterns of foreign-born residents in Fresno show some spatial clustering of residents by neighborhood. Residents from Mexico, India, the Philippines, Laos, and Thailand (including Hmong residents) represent the largest foreign-born populations. Mexican and Hmong residents tend to reside in the southeastern portion of the city, while residents from India are clustered in northeastern Fresno (see Figure 14). The geographic distribution of residents with limited English proficiency (LEP) closely resembles patterns of the foreign-born population. The most common languages of LEP populations are Spanish, Hmong, other Indic languages, Laotian, and Cambodian. The most visible clustering of LEP residents is of the Spanish- and Hmong-speaking populations in south Fresno. (see Figure 14). Meeting attendees, interviewees, and survey respondents emphasized a need for increased investment in south and west Fresno. The clustering of foreign-born residents and LEP populations in geographic areas of Fresno that may have less access to public improvements points to potential fair housing concerns and a need for continued investment in public improvements in south and west Fresno. At the regional level, there is a large population of foreign-born residents from Mexico and a large Spanish-speaking population (see Figures 16 and 17). FIGURE 14. FOREIGN-BORN POPULATION BY NATIONALITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 39 40 FIGURE 15. POPULATION WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 41 FIGURE 16. FOREIGN-BORN POPULATION BY NATIONALITY IN THE FRESNO REGION 42 FIGURE 17. POPULATION WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY IN THE FRESNO REGION 43 CHAPTER 5. ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY Housing discrimination and residential segregation have limited access to opportunity for specific population groups and communities. It is important to understand opportunity, as used in this context, as a subjective quality. Typically, the term refers to access to resources like employment, quality education, healthcare, childcare, and other services that allow individuals and communities to achieve a high quality of life. However, research on this subject has found perceptions of opportunity follow similar themes but are prioritized differently by different groups. Racial and ethnic minorities, low-income groups, and residents of distressed neighborhoods identified job access, employment, and training as important opportunities while White residents, higher income groups, and residents of wealthier neighborhoods more often identified sense of community, social connections among neighbors, freedom of choice, education, and retirement savings.11 Proximity is often used to indicate levels of access to opportunity; however, it would be remiss to consider proximity as the only factor in determining level of access. Access to opportunity is also influenced by social, economic, and cultural factors, thus making it difficult to accurately identify and measure. HUD conducted research regarding Moving to Opportunity for Fair Housing (MTO) to understand the impact of increased access to opportunity. Researchers found residents who moved to lower-poverty neighborhoods experienced safer neighborhoods and better health outcomes, but there was no significant change in educational outcomes, employment, or income.12 However, recent studies show the long-term effects of MTO on the educational attainment of children who were under the age of 13 are overwhelmingly positive with improved college attendance rates and higher incomes. On the other hand, children who were over the age of 13 show negative long-term impacts from MTO.13 The strategy to improve access to opportunities has been two-pronged with different housing and community development programs. Tenant-based housing vouchers allow mobility of recipients to locate in lower-poverty areas while programs like the Community Development Block Grant and Choice Neighborhoods Initiative provide funds to increase opportunities in disadvantaged neighborhoods. 11 Lung-Amam, Willow S., et al. "Opportunity for Whom? The Diverse Definitions of Neighborhood Opportunity in Baltimore." City and Community, vol. 17, no. 3, 27 Sept. 2018, pp. 636-657, doi:10.1111/cico.12318. 12 Moving to Opportunity for Fair Housing Demonstration Program: Final Impacts Evaluation. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, www.huduser.gov/portal//publications/pdf/MTOFHD_fullreport_v2.pdf. 13 Chetty, Raj, Nathaniel Hendren, and Lawrence F. Katz. 2016. "The Effects of Exposure to Better Neighborhoods on Children: New Evidence from the Moving to Opportunity Experiment." American Economic Review, 106 (4): 855- 902. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/hendren/files/mto_paper.pdf 44 Overview of HUD-Defined Opportunity Factors Among the many factors that drive housing choice for individuals and families are neighborhood factors including access to quality schools, jobs, and transit. To measure economic and educational conditions at a neighborhood level, HUD developed a methodology to quantify the degree to which a neighborhood provides such opportunities. For each block group in the U.S., HUD provides a score on several “opportunity dimensions,” including school proficiency, poverty, labor market engagement, jobs proximity, transportation costs, transit trips, and environmental health. For each block group, a value is calculated for each index and results are then standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking within the metro area, state, or nation. For each opportunity dimension, a higher index score indicates more favorable neighborhood characteristics. Average index values by race and ethnicity for the city and region are provided in Table 5 for the total population and the population living below the federal poverty line. These values can be used to assess whether some population subgroups tend to live in higher opportunity areas than others and will be discussed in more detail by opportunity dimension throughout the remainder of this chapter. The Opportunity Index Disparity measures the difference between the scores for the white non-Hispanic group and other groups. A negative score indicates that the particular subgroup has a lower score on that dimension than the white non-Hispanic group. A positive score indicates that the subgroup has a higher score than the white non-Hispanic Group. Figures 18 through 28 map each of the opportunity dimensions along with demographic information such as race and ethnicity. 45 TABLE 5. DISPARITY IN ACCESS TO NEIGHBORHOOD OPPORTUNITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO AND THE FRESNO REGION Opportunity Dimension Race / Ethnicity Opportunity Index Disparity between White Non-Hispanic Population and Other Groups Non-Hispanic Hispanic White Black Asian or Pacific Islander Native American Black Asian Native American Hispanic City of Fresno – Total Population School Proficiency Index 59.9 35.5 45.3 41.3 34.6 -24.4 -14.5 -18.6 -25.3 Jobs Proximity Index 48.6 48.9 43.7 47.9 46.4 0.3 -4.8 -0.6 -2.2 Labor Market Index 43.7 20.8 28.7 25.0 20.4 -22.9 -15.0 -18.8 -23.4 Transit Index 58.0 63.7 60.0 62.1 63.5 5.8 2.0 4.2 5.6 Low Transportation Cost Index 36.5 42.2 37.0 41.2 42.0 5.7 0.5 4.7 5.5 Low Poverty Index 45.5 20.9 30.2 24.4 19.5 -24.6 -15.3 -21.1 -26.0 Environmental Health Index 22.0 16.6 19.3 17.2 15.9 -5.4 -2.7 -4.9 -6.2 City of Fresno – Population below the Poverty Line School Proficiency Index 46.3 32.3 28.5 32.5 27.7 -14.0 -17.8 -13.8 -18.6 Jobs Proximity Index 50.1 49.0 44.3 46.2 48.4 -1.0 -5.8 -3.9 -1.7 Labor Market Index 27.4 13.7 14.4 15.8 12.9 -13.7 -13.0 -11.6 -14.5 Transit Index 63.0 66.6 64.3 64.7 66.1 3.6 1.3 1.7 3.1 Low Transportation Cost Index 43.3 45.5 42.8 44.7 45.4 2.2 -0.5 1.4 2.1 Low Poverty Index 26.0 12.3 12.7 15.4 9.7 -13.8 -13.3 -10.6 -16.3 Environmental Health Index 17.3 14.1 15.0 13.9 13.6 -3.2 -2.3 -3.4 -3.7 Data Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 46 TABLE 5. DISPARITY IN ACCESS TO NEIGHBORHOOD OPPORTUNITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO AND THE FRESNO REGION (CONTINUED) Opportunity Dimension Race / Ethnicity Opportunity Index Disparity between White Non-Hispanic Population and Other Groups Non-Hispanic Hispanic White Black Asian or Pacific Islander Native American Black Asian Native American Hispanic Fresno Region – Total Population School Proficiency Index 59.2 36.6 48.6 46.7 33.3 -22.6 -10.6 -12.5 -25.8 Jobs Proximity Index 47.0 48.2 43.3 46.9 48.2 1.2 -3.7 -0.1 1.2 Labor Market Index 43.3 21.9 32.4 28.5 21.9 -21.3 -10.9 -14.8 -21.3 Transit Index 50.9 61.9 55.6 51.9 56.3 11.0 4.7 1.0 5.3 Low Transportation Cost Index 28.8 40.1 32.2 31.5 31.7 11.3 3.4 2.7 2.9 Low Poverty Index 47.0 23.4 34.5 32.5 21.2 -23.6 -12.5 -14.5 -25.8 Environmental Health Index 31.5 21.0 23.9 31.3 30.5 -10.5 -7.6 -0.2 -1.0 Fresno Region – Population below the Poverty Line School Proficiency Index 46.7 31.7 32.2 37.9 27.1 -15.0 -14.6 -8.9 -19.6 Jobs Proximity Index 49.3 48.9 44.9 43.8 48.9 -0.5 -4.5 -5.6 -0.5 Labor Market Index 29.0 14.1 17.1 15.7 15.5 -14.9 -11.8 -13.3 -13.5 Transit Index 57.2 65.3 62.0 60.2 58.4 8.2 4.8 3.0 1.2 Low Transportation Cost Index 36.5 44.1 40.5 40.6 33.9 7.5 4.0 4.0 -2.7 Low Poverty Index 29.2 12.9 15.4 16.9 12.2 -16.2 -13.8 -12.2 -17.0 Environmental Health Index 24.8 15.7 16.9 25.2 30.7 -9.1 -7.9 0.4 5.9 Data Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 47 Education School proficiency is an indication of the quality of education that is available to residents of an area. High quality education is a vital community resource that can lead to more opportunities and improve quality of life. HUD’s school proficiency index is calculated based on the performance of 4th grade students on state reading and math exams. For each block group, the index is calculated using test results in up to the three closest schools within 1.5 miles. Results are then standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking within the state. A higher index score indicates greater access to high-performing elementary schools.14 Figure 18 shows HUD-provided opportunity scores related to education for block groups within the city of Fresno, along with the demographic indicators of race and ethnicity. In each map, lighter shading indicates areas of lower opportunity and darker shading indicates higher opportunity. Access to proficient schools among block groups varies significantly throughout the city. While block groups in north Fresno generally have high levels of access to proficient schools, those in south and west Fresno have very low levels of access (see Figure 18). Access to proficient schools also varies by race and ethnicity. Block groups in north Fresno, which have higher proportions of white residents, have the highest school proficiency index scores. School proficiency index scores are lowest in the southern and western portions of the city, areas in which Hispanic and Black/ African American residents are more likely to reside. The opportunity dimension scores in Table 5 also indicate disparities in access to proficient schools among racial and ethnic groups in Fresno. The greatest disparities exist between the white population, with a school proficiency index score of 59.9, and Hispanic and Black populations (with scores of 34.6 and 35.5, respectively). The populations below the federal poverty line experience greater disparities in levels of access to proficient schools, with Hispanic and Asian or Pacific Islander populations below the poverty line experiencing the lowest access to proficient schools. In the Fresno metro area, school proficiency index scores are lower for white and Hispanic populations and higher for other groups relative to scores in the city. Disparities among racial and ethnic groups are lower for all groups except the white and Hispanic populations. Population groups below the poverty line in the region have lower access to proficient schools, with Black and Hispanic populations below the poverty line experiencing the lowest levels of access in the region. 14 HUD’s data sources for its school proficiency index include attendance area zones from School Attendance Boundary Information System (SABINS) and Maponics, school proficiency data from Great Schools, and school addresses and attendance from Common Core of Data. For a more detailed description of HUD’s methodology and data sources, please see HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Data Documentation appended to this report. SCHOOL PROFICIENCY INDEX: BASED ON 4TH GRADE STUDENT PERFORMANCE ON STATE READING AND MATH TESTS AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS IN OR NEAR EACH BLOCK GROUP 48 Results from the survey conducted over the course of this planning process echoed these concerns surrounding disparate access to proficient schools, with 40 percent of survey respondents noting that schools in the city are not equally provided, compared to 30 percent stating that they are equally provided. FIGURE 18. SCHOOL PROFICIENCY INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 49 Employment Neighborhoods with jobs in close proximity are often assumed to have good access to jobs. However, distance alone does not capture any other factor such as transportation options, the type of jobs available in the area, or the education and training necessary to obtain them. There may be concentrations of jobs and low-income neighborhoods in urban centers, but many of the jobs may be unattainable for residents of low-income neighborhoods. Therefore, this section analyzes both the labor market engagement and jobs proximity indices, which together offer a better indication of job accessibility for residents of specific areas. The Jobs Proximity Index measures the physical distance between place of residence and job locations, with employment centers weighted more heavily. It also takes into account the local labor supply (i.e., competition for jobs) near such employment centers. Block group results are then standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking within the metro area. A higher index score indicates greater access to job locations.15 The Jobs Proximity Index scores of block groups in the city of Fresno are mapped in Figure 19 along with the population distribution by race and ethnicity. The Labor Market Engagement Index is based on unemployment rate, labor force participation rate, and the percent of the population age 25 and over with a bachelor’s degree or higher. Block group results are standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking nationally. A higher index score indicates greater labor market engagement.16 Figure 20 maps Labor Market Engagement Index scores for block groups in Fresno. Again, lighter shading indicates areas of lower opportunity and darker shading indicates higher opportunity. Mapping the Jobs Proximity Index shows that Fresno has moderate levels of jobs proximity and that block groups with high proximity to jobs are well-distributed across the city (see Figure 19). Mapping the Labor Market Engagement Index shows low levels of engagement with the labor market in most of the city’s block groups, with stark disparities in labor market engagement by area of the city (see Figure 20). While block groups in north Fresno display high levels of labor market engagement, the rest of the city has very low levels of engagement with the labor market, indicating high unemployment rates and low educational attainment. 15 HUD’s data source for its jobs proximity index includes the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) database. For a more detailed description of HUD’s methodology and data sources, please see HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Data Documentation appended to this report. 16 HUD’s data source for its labor market engagement index is the American Community Survey. For a more detailed description of HUD’s methodology and data sources, please see HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Data Documentation appended to this report. JOBS PROXIMITY INDEX: BASED ON DISTANCE TO REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT CENTERS AND THE LABOR SUPPLY SERVING THOSE CENTERS LABOR MARKET ENGAGEMENT INDEX: BASED ON EMPLOYMENT LEVELS, LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATES, AND EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT 50 FIGURE 19. JOBS PROXIMITY INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 51 FIGURE 20. LABOR MARKET INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Table 5 shows patterns for both Jobs Proximity and Labor Market Engagement across racial and ethnic groups. While proximity to jobs is similar across racial and ethnic groups in Fresno, significant disparities exist in labor market engagement. In particular, the white population has greater engagement with the labor market than all other racial and ethnic groups. Hispanic and Black populations experience the lowest levels of labor market engagement in the city. Map Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 52 The city’s population living below the poverty line generally has higher levels of jobs proximity compared to the population in the city as a whole but lower levels of labor market engagement, indicating inability to access jobs due to factors other than proximity. Interviews with stakeholders in the city indicate that these factors may include lack of access to transportation and mismatches between available jobs and worker education and skillsets. Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics data also show that a low proportion of residents both live and work in Fresno (see Table 6), indicating high levels of commuting outside of the city and that access to vehicles may present barriers for many residents in accessing employment. TABLE 6. INFLOW AND OUTFLOW OF WORKERS, CITY OF FRESNO, 2017 Inflow and Outflow of Workers Number Percent Living in the City of Fresno 194,549 100.0% Living in the City but Employed Outside of the City 84,704 43.5% Living and Employed in the City of Fresno 109,845 56.5% Employed in the City of Fresno 224,693 100.0% Employed in the City but Living Outside of the City 114,848 51.1% Employed and Living in the City of Fresno 109,845 48.9% Note: Data covers all of San Bernardino County and is not limited to the jurisdictions participating in the County’s CDBG program. Source: Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LODES) data, 2017 The long distances required to access employment for many workers may also be a cause of the relatively high unemployment levels in the city. Unemployment for the population 16 and older in Fresno was 11.1 percent in 2017 compared to 7.7 percent in the state of California overall. Within the Fresno metro area, jobs proximity levels are similar to those in the city, with little disparity across racial groups (see Table 5). Scores for labor market engagement in the metro are generally slightly higher than those in the city. In addition to jobs proximity and labor market engagement, household income is a good indicator of access to employment. Median household incomes tend to be low in south Fresno and high in north Fresno (see Figure 21). Variation in household income by census tract generally follows the spatial patterns of labor market engagement seen in Figure 20. In line with these findings regarding access to employment, survey respondents ranked incentives for job creation as the greatest economic and community development need in the city, with 59 percent of respondents rating them as a high need and 30 percent rating them as a moderate need. Employment training was rated as one of the top public service needs in the city, with 58 percent of respondents rating it as a high need and 30 percent rating it as a moderate need. 53 FIGURE 21. MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN THE CITY OF FRESNO In Fresno County, monthly costs for a family of two adults and one school-aged child, including housing, childcare, healthcare, food, transportation, and other miscellaneous costs, are estimated at $3,813 (or $45,756 annually).17 Yet, 23.1 percent of primary jobs held by Fresno residents pay $1,250 per month or less ($15,000 or less per year), and 44.2 percent of jobs pay between $1,251 and $3,333 (between $15,000 and $39,996 per year),18 indicating that a high proportion of the city’s residents do not make sufficient income to provide for basic needs. 17 Insight Center. (2018). Family Needs Calculator. Data from The Self Sufficiency Standard for California, 2018, Center for Women’s Welfare, University of Washington. Retrieved from: https://insightcced.org/2018-family-needs- calculator/ 18 Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics data. Home Area Profile Analysis. Retrieved from: https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/ 54 Transportation The Transit Trip Index measures how often low-income renter families in a neighborhood use public transit. Values are then standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking nationally. The higher the index value, the more likely residents in that neighborhood use public transit. The Low Transportation Cost Index is based on estimates of transportation costs as a percent of income for low- income renter families in a given neighborhood. Results are standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking nationally. The higher the Low Transportation Cost Index, the lower the cost of transportation in that neighborhood.19 Figures 22 and 23 map Transit Trip and Low Transportation Cost Index values for Fresno. Lighter shading indicates areas of lower opportunity (i.e., less transit use and higher transportation costs) and darker shading indicates higher opportunity (i.e., higher transit use and lower transportation costs). Transit usage is generally moderate and relatively uniform throughout most block groups in Fresno (see Figure 22). Transit usage is highest in south and west Fresno and lowest in the city’s most northern block groups. Transit Trip Index scores indicate low variation in levels of transit usage among racial and ethnic groups in Fresno, with the Black and Hispanic populations using transit at higher rates than other groups and the white population using transit at lower rates. Compared to populations above the poverty line, transit use is somewhat higher for all racial and ethnic groups below the poverty line. Transit usage is slightly lower and disparities among some racial and ethnic groups slightly higher in the Fresno MSA relative to those in the city of Fresno. The Black and Asian or Pacific Islander populations below the poverty line use public transportation most frequently in the region. Black, Hispanic, and Asian or Pacific Islander populations in the region use transit at higher rates than white and Native American populations. Access to low-cost transportation is moderate and relatively uniform throughout most block groups in Fresno (see Figure 23). Block groups adjacent to the city boundaries tend to have the lowest levels of access to low-cost transportation. 19 HUD’s data source for its transit trip and low transportation costs indices is Location Affordability Index (LAI) data. For a more detailed description of HUD’s methodology and data sources, please see HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Data Documentation appended to this report. TRANSIT TRIP INDEX: BASED ON ESTIMATED NUMBER OF TRANSIT TRIPS TAKEN BY FAMILIES WITH INCOMES AT 50% OF MEDIAN INCOME FOR RENTERS IN THE REGION LOW TRANSPORTATION COST INDEX: BASED ON TRANSPORTATION COSTS AS A SHARE OF INCOME FOR FAMILIES WITH INCOMES AT 50% OF MEDIAN INCOME FOR RETNERS IN THE REGION 55 As in the Transit Trips Index, there is little variation in Low Transportation Cost Index scores among racial and ethnic groups (see Table 5). Access to low-cost transportation is slightly higher for groups living below the poverty line. Low Transportation Index scores in the Fresno MSA are lower for all populations compared to scores in Fresno. The Black population in the region has the greatest access to low-cost transportation, while the white population has the lowest levels of access. FIGURE 22. TRANSIT TRIPS INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 56 FIGURE 23. LOW TRANSPORTATION COST INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 57 Walk Score measures the walkability of any address by analyzing hundreds of walking routes to nearby amenities using population density and road metrics such as block length and intersection density. Data sources include Google, Education.com, Open Street Map, the U.S. Census, Localeze, and places added by the Walk Score user community. Points are awarded based on the distance to amenities in several categories including grocery stores, parks, restaurants, schools, and shopping. Not only is the measure useful for showing walkability but also access in general to critical facilities. The city of Fresno is generally car-dependent but there is some variation in level of walkability and access to amenities (see Figure 24) among its various communities. Downtown Fresno has the highest levels of walkability, but small walkable areas exist throughout the city. Overall low levels of walkability in Fresno combined with moderate levels of access to low-cost transit point to potential challenges for residents without access to vehicles in accessing needed services and amenities. FIGURE 24. WALKABILITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: Walk Score, Retrieved from: https://www.walkscore.com/CA/Fresno 58 High transportation costs also contribute to overall low levels of affordability in Fresno. For a typical household in the region, combined housing and transportation costs associated with residing in Fresno would make up an estimated 61 percent of household income. For a moderate-income household in the region, the proportion jumps to 71 percent (see Figure 25). Notably, combined housing and transportation costs are lower closer to the city center and are generally higher further out from the city. FIGURE 25. HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION COSTS AS PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN FRESNO AND SURROUNDING AREAS 59 Poverty Residents in high poverty areas tend to have lower levels of access to opportunity due to the absence of critical resources and disinvestment in their communities. As poverty increases, disparities in access to opportunities often increase among population groups and disadvantaged communities become even more isolated. HUD’s Low Poverty Index uses family poverty rates (based on the federal poverty line) to measure exposure to poverty by neighborhood. Values are standardized based on national ranking to produce scores ranging from 0 to 100 where a higher score indicates less exposure to poverty.20 Figure 26 maps Low Poverty Index scores for Fresno. Lighter shading indicates areas of higher poverty and darker shading indicates lower levels of poverty. Figure 27 also shows concentrations of poverty by block group in Fresno. Most block groups in the city have high levels of exposure to poverty, and the overall poverty rate in Fresno is 28.4 percent (see Table 7). However, exposure to poverty varies by location in the city, with some areas of the city experiencing higher rates of poverty than others. Specifically, block groups in south and west Fresno tend to have higher exposure to poverty, while the city’s northernmost block groups have relatively low levels of poverty. Low Poverty Index scores show overall low scores (high exposure to poverty) and large disparities among racial and ethnic groups with regard to exposure to poverty (see Table 5). The White population is exposed to the lowest levels of poverty among population groups. The Hispanic and Black populations experience the greatest exposure to poverty in Fresno. Low Poverty Index scores of racial and ethnic groups in the Fresno MSA are higher than those in the city, indicating lower exposure to poverty in the region. Similar to the city, the white population experiences the lowest exposure to poverty in the region, while the Black and Hispanic populations in the region are exposed to significantly higher levels of poverty (see Table 5). American Community Survey data on poverty status by race and ethnicity shows that the white and Asian populations in Fresno are least likely to be living below the poverty level, while Black and American Indian or Alaskan Native residents experience the highest levels of poverty. The Hispanic population (of any race) constitutes the greatest number of individuals below the poverty level at more than 85,000 people (see Figure 28 and Table 7). 20 HUD’s data source for its low poverty index is the American Community Survey. For a more detailed description of HUD’s methodology and data sources, please see HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool Data Documentation appended to this report. LOW POVERTY INDEX: BASED ON NEIGHBORHOOD POVERTY RATES 60 FIGURE 26. LOW POVERTY INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO FIGURE 27. POVERTY RATE IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 61 62 24% 42% 40% 28% 36% 36% 30% 34% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% White alone Black or African American alone American Indian and Alaska Native alone Asian alone Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone Some other race alone Two or more races Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race)Percent Below Poverty Level Race/ Ethnicity Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2013- FIGURE 28. PERCENT BELOW POVERTY BY RACE/ ETHNICITY, CITY OF FRESNO, 2013-2017 63 TABLE 7. POVERTY STATUS BY RACE/ ETHNICITY, CITY OF FRESNO, 2013-2017 Race Population Population Below Poverty Level Percent Below the Poverty Level White alone 289,659 69,986 24.2% Black or African American alone 39,260 16,408 41.8% American Indian and Alaska Native alone 5,765 2,290 39.7% Asian alone 69,928 19,776 28.3% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 726 259 35.7% Some other race alone 83,115 29,628 35.6% Two or more races 22,036 6,559 29.9% Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 250,924 85,189 34.0% Total Population for Whom Poverty Status is Determined 510,489 144,946 28.4% Source: ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2013-2017 (Table S1701) 64 Environmental Health HUD’s Environmental Health Index measures exposure based on EPA estimates of air quality (considering carcinogenic, respiratory, and neurological toxins) by neighborhood. The index only measures issues related to air quality and not other factors impacting environmental health. Values are standardized based on national ranking to produce scores ranging from 0 to 100 where a higher score indicates less exposure to environmental hazards. Figure 29 maps Environmental Health Index scores for Fresno. Lighter shading indicates areas of higher potential exposure to hazards and darker shading indicates lower levels of environmental hazards. Most block groups in the city of Fresno have very low air quality. The highest air quality in the city can be found in the city’s most northern block groups, which include high proportions of open space and residential land uses. Spatial patterns of Environmental Health Index scores and residential patterns by race/ ethnicity suggest low levels of disparity among racial and ethnic groups with regard to air quality (see Figure 29). Environmental Health Index scores in Fresno also suggest high levels of exposure to low air quality across racial and ethnic groups, with little disparity among groups (see Table 5). The Hispanic, Black, and Asian or Pacific Islander populations below the poverty line in the city are exposed to the lowest levels of air quality. Air quality throughout the larger Fresno MSA is higher than in the city of Fresno as evidenced by the higher scores, while disparities among population groups are greater than those found in the city (see Table 5). White, Native American, and Hispanic populations in the region experience the highest levels of air quality. Index scores suggest that Black and Asian or Pacific Islander populations reside in areas in the region with the lowest air quality. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH INDEX: BASED ON STANDARDIZED EPA ESTIMATES OF AIR QUALITY HAZARDS 65 FIGURE 29. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH INDEX IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: HUD Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, AFFHT0004, Released November 2017, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/ 66 A Superfund site is any land in the United States that has been contaminated by hazardous waste and identified by the EPA as a candidate for cleanup because it poses a risk to human health and/or the environment. These sites are placed on the National Priorities List (NPL). There are two NPL sites within the city of Fresno--the 145-acre Fresno Municipal Sanitary Landfill in southwest Fresno and the half-acre Industrial Waste Processing site in north Fresno (see Figure 30). The 5-acre T.H. Agriculture & Nutrition Company site, a deleted NPL site in the city, was removed from the NPL in 2006 following cleanup. One NPL site exists immediately outside of the city of Fresno in the community of Malaga. FIGURE 30. SUPERFUND NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL) SITES IN THE FRESNO REGION Map Source: Environmental Protection Agency GIS Data, Retrieved from: https://www.epa.gov/superfund/search-superfund-sites- where-you-live 67 The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) tracks the management of certain toxic chemicals that may pose a threat to human health and the environment. Certain industrial facilities in the U.S. must report annually how much of each chemical is recycled, combusted for energy recovery, treated for destruction, and disposed of or otherwise released on- and off-site. This information is collectively referred to as production-related waste managed. The 18 toxic release inventory facilities in Fresno are clustered in south and west Fresno (see Figure 31). The top five establishments by total disposal or other releases include beverage, food, chemical, and transportation industries (see Figure 32). FIGURE 31. TOXIC RELEASE INVENTORY (TRI) IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: Environmental Protection Agency GIS Data, Retrieved from: https://enviro.epa.gov/triexplorer/tri_factsheet.factsheet?pYear=2017&pstate=CA&pcity=fresno&pParent=NAT FIGURE 32. TOP FIVE ESTABLISHMENTS BY TOTAL DISPOSAL OR OTHER RELEASES IN THE CITY OF FRESNO, 2017 Map Source: Environmental Protection Agency, Retrieved from: https://enviro.epa.gov/triexplorer/tri_factsheet.factsheet?pYear=2017&pstate=CA&pcity=fresno&pParent=NAT 68 Access to environmental amenities is another component of environmental health. According to the Trust for Public Land’s ParkScore data for 2019, Fresno ranks 92nd of the 100 most populous metros in the United States with regard to park acreage, investment, amenities, and access. Fresno received the lowest ratings for park spending per resident (a score of 10 out of 100) and for median park size and percent of area dedicated to parks (a score of 17.5 out of 100). Areas classified as having the highest levels of park need are primarily clustered in west and south Fresno (see Figure 33). FIGURE 33. PARK NEED IN THE CITY OF FRESNO Map Source: Trust for Public Land ParkScore, Retrieved from: https://www.tpl.org/city/fresno-california Food Access Food access is another important component of access to opportunity, as access to food that is both affordable and nutritious is a challenge for many individuals and families in the United States. In neighborhoods in which the nearest grocery store is many miles away, transportation costs and lack of vehicle access may present particular challenges for low-income households, which may be forced to rely on smaller stores that are often not affordable and may not offer a full range of healthy food choices. Even in areas in close proximity to food outlets, the higher cost of healthy foods such as produce often present barriers to healthy food access.21 21 Valdez Z, Ramírez AS, Estrada E, Grassi K, Nathan S. Community Perspectives on Access to and Availability of Healthy Food in Rural, Low-Resource, Latino Communities. Prev Chronic Dis 2016;13:160250. 69 The Action Plan to Improve Food Access in the Central Valley (2016) notes that city of Fresno is among the top five urban areas in the country for rates of hunger, with children, the elderly, the homeless, and college students experiencing the highest rates of food insecurity.22 Similarly, analysis by Feeding America indicates that 14.0 percent of all residents and 24.8 percent of children in Fresno County are food insecure, meaning that they lack access, at times, to enough food for an active, healthy life for all members of a given household, and have limited or uncertain access to nutritionally adequate foods.23 While data on food access by neighborhood or census tract is not available for the city of Fresno, stakeholders interviewed in the course of this planning process noted a lack of access to fresh food outlets in south and west Fresno. Survey respondents echoed concerns surrounding food access in the city, with 52 percent noting that grocery stores and other shopping opportunities are not equally provided. Only 22 percent of respondents described grocery stores and other shopping as equally provided in the city. Only parks and trails and property maintenance were ranked as less evenly provided than grocery stores and other shopping. As higher proportions of Hispanic residents live in south and west Fresno, lower levels of food access in these areas of the city may present fair housing concerns. The Action Plan to Improve Food Access in the Central Valley (2016) includes several recommendations to improve food access in the region, including mobile markets, summer meal sites, and job training programs focused on increasing residents’ ability to afford fresh food. Summary City of Fresno residents tend to have moderate proximity to jobs, levels of transit usage, and access to low-cost transportation, with low levels of disparity among racial and ethnic groups. Low scores on the Environmental Health Index suggest poor air quality, with similar scores across racial and ethnic groups. Greater disparities exist among racial and ethnic groups with regard to school proficiency, labor market engagement, and exposure to poverty. The population living below the poverty level has less access to proficient schools, lower labor market engagement, and lower air quality relative to the total population in Fresno. High levels of disparities exist among racial and ethnic groups regarding access to proficient schools in Fresno. The largest disparities exist between the white population (School Proficiency Index score of 59.9) and the Hispanic and Black populations (scores of 34.6 and 35.5, respectively). Disparities among racial and ethnic groups in access to proficient schools are also high the regional level. Fresno has moderate Jobs Proximity Index scores with low levels of disparities in distance to job locations among racial and ethnic groups. Proximity to jobs is similar at the regional level, with little disparity among racial and ethnic groups. In combination with these moderate Jobs Proximity index scores, stakeholder input and Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics data suggest that many workers who live in the city commute long distances to their places of work. In particular, 43.5 percent of workers living in Fresno are employed outside of the city. 22 Central Valley Food Access Working Group. (2016). Action Plan to Improve Food Access in the Central Valley. Retrieved from: https://cafarmtofork.cdfa.ca.gov/files/ActionPlantoImproveFoodAccessintheCentralValley.pdf 23 Feeding America. (2017). Map the Meal Gap: Food Insecurity in Fresno County. Retrieved from: https://map.feedingamerica.org/county/2017/child/california/county/fresno 70 Labor Market Index scores indicate overall low levels of engagement with the labor market, with high levels of disparities among racial and ethnic groups. The white population has the highest level of engagement with the labor market among all groups (43.7 points), followed by the Asian or Pacific Islander population (28.7 points). The greatest disparity in labor market engagement, with a difference of 30.8 points, is between the white population (43.7 points) and the Hispanic population below the poverty line (12.9 points). Transit Trip Index scores indicate little disparity and overall moderate levels of transit usage among racial and ethnic groups in Fresno. Black and Hispanic populations use transit at the highest rates. Transit usage in the Fresno MSA region is lower than that in the city. Low Transportation Cost scores are moderate throughout most block groups in the city, and disparities are low among racial and ethnic groups. The Black and Hispanic populations below the poverty level experience lower transportation costs and closer proximity to public transportation than other groups. Low Poverty index scores indicate high levels of poverty in Fresno, with high levels of disparities among racial and ethnic groups in exposure to poverty. Hispanic and Black populations in the city experience the greatest exposure to poverty, while the white population is the least exposed to poverty. Higher scores in the region suggest that residents outside of the city of Fresno are less exposed to poverty relative to Fresno residents. Indicators of environmental health also indicate disparities among racial and ethnic groups. Air quality is relatively low across all block groups in Fresno, although block groups in the most northern block groups experience slightly better air quality. Environmental Health Index scores suggest little disparity in exposure to low air quality among racial and ethnic groups. Hispanic, Native American, and Black populations below the poverty level experience the greatest exposure to low air quality. Brownfields and toxic sites tend to be clustered in south and west Fresno, areas in which Hispanic, Black, Asian or Pacific Islander, and Native Americans populations tend to make up greater proportions of the city’s population relative to north Fresno. South and west Fresno also tend to have the lowest levels of park access in Fresno, indicating that these areas experience both increased exposure to environmental hazards and reduced access to environmental amenities relative to north Fresno. Finally, research, stakeholder interviews, and a community survey conducted throughout this planning process indicate high levels of food insecurity in Fresno and the region. In particular, stakeholders emphasized that residents in south and west Fresno have less access to fresh, healthy, and affordable food. As higher proportions of Hispanic residents live in south and west Fresno, lower levels of food access in these areas of the city may present fair housing concerns. 71 CHAPTER 6. HOUSING PROFILE The availability of quality affordable housing plays a vital role in ensuring housing opportunities are fairly accessible to all residents. On the surface, high housing costs in certain areas are exclusionary based solely on income. But the disproportionate representation of several protected class groups in low- and middle-income levels can lead to unequal access to housing options and neighborhood opportunity in high-cost housing markets. Black and Hispanic residents, immigrants, people with disabilities, and seniors often experience additional fair housing barriers when affordable housing is scarce. Beyond providing fair housing options, the social, economic, and health benefits of providing quality affordable housing are well-documented. National studies have shown affordable housing encourages diverse, mixed-income communities, which result in many social benefits. Affordable housing also increases job accessibility for low- and middle-income populations and attracts a diverse labor force critical for industries that provide basic services for the community. Affordable housing is also linked to improvements in mental health, reduction of stress, and decreased cases of illnesses caused by poor-quality housing.24 Developing affordable housing is also a strategy used to prevent displacement of existing residents when housing costs increase due to economic or migratory shifts. Conversely, a lack of affordable housing eliminates many of these benefits and increases socioeconomic segregation. High housing costs are linked to displacement of low-income households and an increased risk of homelessness.25 Often lacking the capital to relocate to better neighborhoods, displaced residents tend to move to socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods where housing costs are most affordable.26 This section discusses the existing supply of housing in the city of Fresno. It also reviews housing costs, including affordability and other housing needs by householder income. Homeownership rates and access to lending for home purchases are also assessed. Housing Supply Summary According to the 2013-2017 American Community Survey, there are 176,617 housing units in Fresno, which represents an increase of 18.5% since 2000. Of Fresno’s total housing units, 93.5% are occupied and 6.5% are vacant (a rate which is nearly identical to the city’s vacancy rate in 2000, 6.4%). Vacancies in Fresno County are at 7.5% of all housing units. Both of these rates are relatively low and indicate that additional housing development may be needed to accommodate future population growth. The vacancy rate, calculated from ACS data, includes 24 Maqbool, Nabihah, et al. "The Impacts of Affordable Housing on Health: A Research Summary." Insights from Housing Policy Research, Center for Housing Policy, www.rupco.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/The-Impacts-of- Affordable-Housing-on-Health-CenterforHousingPolicy-Maqbool.etal.pdf. 25 “State of the Nation’s Housing 2015.” Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University, http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/jchs-sonhr-2015-full.pdf 26 Deirdre Oakley & Keri Burchfield (2009) Out of the Projects, Still in the Hood: The Spatial Constraints on Public- Housing Residents’ Relocation in Chicago.” Journal of Urban Affairs, 31:5, 589-614. 72 housing that is available for sale or rent, housing that has been rented or sold but not yet occupied, seasonal housing, and other vacant units. Thus, the actual number of rental and for- sale units that are available for occupancy are likely lower than these figures indicate. TABLE 8. HOUSING UNITS BY OCCUPANCY STATUS Variety in terms of housing structure type is important in providing housing options suitable to meet the needs of all residents, including different members of protected classes. Multifamily housing, including rental apartments, are often more affordable than single-family homes for low- and moderate-income households, who are disproportionately likely to be households of color. Multifamily units may also be the preference of some elderly and disabled householders who are unable or do not desire to maintain a single-family home. Table 9 shows Fresno’s housing units by structure type. The most predominant form of housing unit is the single-family detached home, which makes up 60.6% of Fresno housing units. Over one-quarter of the city’s housing units are either small multifamily units (14.0%) or duplexes, triplexes and quadraplexes (14.2%). Scarcer housing types include large multifamily (4.5%), attached single-family units (2.5%), mobile homes (3.8%) and other units such as RVs, boats and vans (0.1%). Input received during the community engagement process indicated that stakeholders think Fresno would benefit from a wider variety of housing types – including more condominiums and townhomes citywide and rental apartments in North Fresno. In Fresno County, detached single-family homes and large multifamily units are more prominent than in the city (making up 67.7% and 6.5% of county housing units, respectively). Smaller multifamily, single-family attached units, and all other housing units types occur less frequently in the county than in the city of Fresno. 2000 2010 2013-2017 2000-2017 Change City of Fresno Total Housing Units 149,025 171,288 176,617 18.5% Occupied Housing Units 140,079 158,349 165,107 17.9% Vacant Housing Units 8,946 12,939 11,510 28.7% Vacancy Rate 6.4% 7.6% 6.5% +0.1% points Fresno County Total Housing Units 270,767 315,531 326,213 20.5% Occupied Housing Units 252,940 289,391 301,824 19.3% Vacant Housing Units 17,827 26,140 24,389 36.8% Vacancy Rate 6.6% 8.3% 7.5% +0.9% points Data Source: U.S. Census 2000 SF1 Table H003 and 2010 SF1 Table H3 and 2012-2016 5- Year American Community Survey Table B25002 73 *TABLE 9. HOUSING UNITS BY STRUCTURE TYPE Availability of housing in a variety of sizes is important to meet the needs of different demographic groups. Neighborhoods with multi-bedroom detached, single-family homes will typically attract larger families, whereas dense residential developments with smaller unit sizes and fewer bedrooms often accommodate single-person households or small families. But market forces and affordability impact housing choice and the ability to obtain housing of a suitable size, and markets that do not offer a variety of housing sizes at different price points can lead to barriers for some groups. Rising housing costs can, for example, lead to overcrowding as large households with lower incomes are unable to afford pricier, larger homes and are forced to reside in smaller units. On the other hand, people with disabilities or seniors with fixed incomes may not require large units but can be limited by higher housing costs in densely populated areas where most studio or one-bedroom units are located. Table 10 explores housing units in Fresno by size and tenure (the unit’s occupation by either a homeowner or renter). Housing units with two or three bedrooms represent the largest share of owner-occupied and renter-occupied units in Fresno (both approximately 70%). While 28% of owner-occupied units have four or more bedrooms, only 7.8% of renter-occupied units are of this size, which may limit choice for larger renter families. Stakeholder input did note the need for larger, affordable units to meet the needs of large families. Studios and one-bedroom apartments make up the remaining 23% of renter-occupied units, while comprising less than 2% of owner-occupied units. The county has a slightly greater share of 4+ bedroom units occupied by both renters and owners than are available in the city, but a smaller share of one-bedroom units occupied by renters. Units in Structure City of Fresno Fresno County Number Percent Number Percent 1, detached 107,034 60.6% 220,865 67.7% 1, attached 4,461 2.5% 7,695 2.4% 2-4 24,973 14.2% 37,538 11.5% 5-19 24,790 14.0% 32,571 10.0% 20 or more 14,772 4.5% 11,425 6.5% Mobile home 12,325 3.8% 3,850 2.2% Other (RV, boat, van, etc.) 447 0.1% 84 0.0% Total 326,213 100.0% 176,617 100.0% Data Source: 2013-2017 5-Year American Community Survey Table B25024 74 TABLE 10. HOUSING UNITS BY SIZE AND TENURE Assessing housing conditions in an area can provide a basis for developing policies and programs to maintain and preserve the quality of the housing stock. The age of an area’s housing can have substantial impact on housing conditions and costs. As housing ages, maintenance costs rise, which can present significant affordability issues for low- and moderate- income homeowners. Aging rental stock can lead to rental rate increases to address physical issues or deteriorating conditions if building owners defer or ignore maintenance needs. Deteriorating housing can also depress neighboring property values, discourage reinvestment, and eventually impact the quality of life in a neighborhood. Additionally, homes built prior to 1978 present the potential for lead exposure risk due to lead-based paint or lead pipes carrying drinking water. Over one-half of housing units in Fresno were built prior to 1980, making a majority of the city’s housing stock at least 40 years old. Housing units built between 1980 and 1999 represent 30% of the housing stock, while housing built since 2000 only represents 16% of the city’s housing stock. Housing units in the county were built in a similar timeframe as the city of Fresno, although there was a slightly greater percentage of units built between 2000-2009 than in the city. Input received during the community engagement process aligns with age trends to indicate the need for housing rehabilitation in Fresno. Residents and other stakeholders noted the need for single-family home repair and rehabilitation, rental rehabilitation, and improvements to aging mobile homes, particularly roof repair. This need was most commonly identified in Southwest Fresno, although some participants noted homes in need of rehabilitation in other areas as well. Number of Bedrooms City of Fresno Fresno County Number Percent Number Percent Owner-Occupied Housing Units Zero 379 0.5% 760 0.5% One 727 0.9% 1,538 1.0% Two or three 54,364 70.2% 108,200 67.6% Four or more 21,922 28.3% 49,503 30.9% Total 77,392 100.0% 160,001 100.0% Renter-Occupied Housing Units Zero 4,324 4.9% 6,147 4.3% One 15,797 18.0% 22,781 16.1% Two or three 60,793 69.3% 99,751 70.3% Four or more 6,801 7.8% 13,144 9.3% Total 87,715 100.0% 141,823 100.0% Note: Total add to the total number of occupied housing units in each geography. Unoccupied units are not included in this table because tenure data is not available for these units. Data Source: 2013-2017 5-Year American Community Survey Table 75 FIGURE 34. AGE OF HOUSING IN THE CITY OF FRESNO AND FRESNO COUNTY 25% 10% 18% 15% 15% 12% 4% 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 Before 1960 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010 to present Number of Housing Units Year Strucutre Built City of Fresno 23% 10% 18% 14% 15% 15% 4% 0 15,000 30,000 45,000 60,000 75,000 90,000 Before 1960 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010 to present Number of Housing Units Year Strucutre Built Fresno County 76 Housing Costs and Affordability The most common housing need identified by stakeholders related to affordability, particularly for low- and moderate-income households. The National Low Income Housing Coalition’s annual Out of Reach report examines rental housing rates relative to income levels for counties throughout the U.S. The figure that follows shows annual household income and hourly wages needed to afford Fair Market Rents (FMRs) in Fresno County for one, two, and three-bedroom rental units. FIGURE 35. REQUIRED WAGES, AND HOURS TO AFFORD FAIR MARKET RENTS IN FRESNO COUNTY, 2018 Note: Required income is the annual income needed to afford Fair Market Rents without spending more than 30% of household income on rent. Minimum wage in Fresno County is $12.00. Average renter wages are $12.81 in Fresno County. Source: National Low Income Housing Coalition Out of Reach 2018, Accessed from http://nlihc.org/oor/california Fair Market Rent (FMR) is a standard set by HUD at the county or regional level for use in administering its Section 8 rental voucher program. FMRs are typically the 40th percentile gross rent (i.e., rent plus utility costs) for typical, non-substandard rental units in the local housing market. To afford a one-bedroom rental unit at the FMR of $769 without being cost burdened (i.e., spending more than 30% of income on housing) would require an annual income of at least $30,760. This amount translates to a 40-hour work week at an hourly wage of $15/hour. It would take a 49-hour work week at the minimum wage of $12.00 to afford the unit or a 46-hour work week at the average renter wage of $12.81. Note that average renter wage was derived by the National Low Income Housing Coalition from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages data for the purpose of evaluating local housing affordability. A household could afford the two-bedroom FMR of $956 with an annual income of $38,240 or higher, or a 40-hour work week at an hourly wage of $18/hour. A minimum wage employee would need to work 61 hours per week to afford the unit. A worker earning the average renter wage would have to work 43 hours per week to afford the unit. Fresno County Housing Costs (Fair Market Rents) 1 Bedroom: $769 2 Bedroom $956 3 Bedroom: $1,364 Wage for 40 Hour Week $15/hour $18/hour $26/hour Hours at Min. Wage 49 hours 61 hours 87 hours Hours at Avg. Renter Wage 46 hours 57 hours 82 hours or or Required Annual Income $30,760 $38,240 $54,560 TO AFFORD A 2-BEDROOM RENTAL UNIT AT FRESNO’S FAIR MARKET RENT OF $956 WOULD REQUIRE A 61 HOURS WORK WEEK AT MINIMUM WAGE. 77 Overall, this data indicates that low incomes make housing at fair market rents unaffordable to individuals earning the minimum wage in Fresno County. Individuals earning average renter wages and working a 40-hour work week can afford one-bedroom housing at FMR but would not be able to afford larger units. While FMRs are set at the metropolitan level, there is variation in housing costs across the region. Figure 36 show rents and monthly owner costs for households in Fresno and Fresno County. Overall, the distribution of rental units by cost are nearly identical at the city and county levels, with the largest share in each area (30%) renting for between $1,000 and $1,500 a month. One quarter of units rent for between $800 and $999, and another 20% for between $600 and $799. A relatively small share in each area (12%) cost over $1,500 a month. Although rental rates in Fresno and Fresno County are relatively modest compared to many other jurisdictions in California and the US, lower incomes in the city mean that affording housing is still difficult for many Fresno residents. The next section looks more specifically at the relationship between housing costs and income. Monthly owner costs (which includes both households with and without a mortgage) are centered in the $1,000 to $1,499 range. About 25% of owners in Fresno and 23% in Fresno County have housing costs in this range. Another one-quarter have housing costs under $600, which likely includes many owners without mortgages. About 19% of owners in the city spend more than $2,000 on housing costs. The next section also considers need related to affordability, overcrowding, and housing conditions for Fresno homeowners. FIGURE 36. GROSS RENT FOR RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN THE CITY OF FRESNO AND FRESNO COUNTY 0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35% $2,500 or more $2,000 - $2,500 $1,500 - $2,000 $1,000 - $1,500 $800 - $999 $600 - $799 Less than $599 Renter Households Gross Monthly Rent Gross Rent for Renter Households City of Fresno Fresno County 78 Housing Needs Housing cost and condition are key components to housing choice. Housing barriers may exist in a jurisdiction when some protected class groups have greater difficulty accessing housing in good condition and that they can afford. To assess affordability and other types of housing needs, HUD defines four housing problems: 1. A household is cost burdened if monthly housing costs (including mortgage payments, property taxes, insurance, and utilities for owners and rent and utilities for renters) exceed 30% of monthly income. 2. A household is overcrowded if there is more than 1.0 people per room, not including kitchen or bathrooms. 3. A housing unit lacks complete kitchen facilities if it lacks one or more of the following: cooking facilities, a refrigerator, or a sink with piped water. 4. A housing unit lacks complete plumbing facilities if it lacks one or more of the following: hot and cold piped water, a flush toilet, or a bathtub or shower. HUD also defines four severe housing problems, including a severe cost burden (more than 50% of monthly housing income is spent on housing costs), severe overcrowding (more than 1.5 people per room, not including kitchens or bathrooms), lack of complete kitchen facilities (as described above), and lack of complete plumbing facilities (also as described above). To assess housing need, HUD receives a special tabulation of data from the U. S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey that is largely not available through standard Census 0%5%10%15%20%25%30% $3,500 or more $3,000 - $3,499 $2,500 - $2,999 $2,000 - $2,499 $1,500 - $1,999 $1,000 - $1,499 $600 - $999 Less than $600 Owner Households Selected Monthly Owner Costs Selected Monthly Owner Costs for Owner Households with a Mortgage City of Fresno Fresno County 79 products. This data, known as Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, counts the number of households that fit certain combination of HUD-specified criteria, such as housing needs by race and ethnicity. CHAS data for the city of Fresno and the Fresno region is provided in the tables that follow. There are 80,870 Fresno households that have at least one housing problem, comprising 51% of all households. Nearly one-third (31%) of all households have a severe housing problem. In the region, housing problems occur at slightly lesser rates; 137,555 households (48%) have at least one housing problem and 83,265 households (29%) have a severe housing problem. Several racial and ethnic groups experience a disproportionately greater rate of housing need compared to white Fresnans. HUD defines a group as having a disproportionate need if its members experience housing needs at a rate that is ten percentage points or more above that of white households. While 39% of white households have a housing problem, 65% of Native American households have a housing problem. Disproportionate rates of housing problems also affect 60% of Hispanic households, 59% of Black households and 54% of Asian households. Hispanic households have 36,850 households with a housing problem, the greatest number of any group. Severe housing needs also disproportionately affect non-white households compared to white households. One-fifth of white households in Fresno experience a severe housing problem. Comparatively, over 40% of Hispanic households experience a severe housing problem, followed by Black households (38%), Native American households (37%) and Asian households (35%). Similar patterns exist in Fresno County, where all non-white households, including other, non-Hispanic households, experience disproportionate rates of both housing problems and severe housing problems compared to their white counterparts. Table 11 also compares housing need rates for households by size and familial status. In the city of Fresno, households with five or more members experience housing problems at a rate of 71%, much higher than non-family households (49%) or small families (45%). This pattern continues in the region, where 67% of large families have a housing problem compared to 47% of non-family households and 41% of small families. This aligns with input received during the community engagement process, which indicated the large, low and moderate income families experience greater difficulty obtaining housing that is both affordable and appropriately-sized. Table 12 examines only one dimension of housing need – severe cost burdens. Severe cost burdens affect 23% of all Fresno households and 20% of households in the region. Black households experience a disproportionate rate of severe housing cost, since one-third of Black households experience severe housing cost compared to only 18% of white households. Similarly, Black households are the only group to have a disproportionate rate of severe housing HOUSEHOLDS OF COLOR ARE MORE LIKELY TO HAVE A HOUSING NEED THAN WHITE HOUSEHOLDS IN THE CITY OF FRESNO AND FRESNO COUNTY. IN THE CITY OF FRESNO, HISPANIC AND AFRICAN AMERICAN HOUSEHOLDS ARE 1.5 TIMES AS LIKELY AS WHITE HOUSEHOLDS TO HAVE A HOUSING NEED. 80 cost in the region, where severe housing costs affect 32% of Black households compared to 16% of white households. Severe housing costs affect small, large and non-family households rather uniformly in both the city and region. In the City of Fresno, one-quarter of non-family households, 22% of small families and 21% of large families have severe housing costs. Comparatively, 24% of non-family households and 19% of both large and small families experience severe housing costs in the region. Figures 37 through 40 map the prevalence of housing cost burdens in Fresno and the Fresno region, along with population by race, ethnicity and national origin. In the city, the highest rates of housing needs are found in census tract 54.08 around Fresno State University, census tract 25.02 along parts of Sequoia Kings Canyon Freeway that are immediate east of downtown Fresno, and census tract 47.04 in northwest Fresno bordered by W. Shields Ave to the south, N. West Ave to the east and W. Dakota Ave to the north. Census tracts in southwest, southeast, west, and central Fresno have elevated levels of housing problems with tracts typically having at least 50% of all households having at least one housing problem. 81 TABLE 11. DEMOGRAPHICS OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH DISPROPORTIONATE HOUSING NEEDS Disproportionate Housing Needs Households Experiencing any of the Four Housing Problems City of Fresno Fresno Region # with problems # of households % with problems # with problems # of households % with Problems Race and Ethnicity White, Non-Hispanic 25,400 64,665 39.3% 46,335 126,010 36.8% Black, Non-Hispanic 8,140 13,775 59.1% 9,105 15,785 57.7% Hispanic 36,850 61,070 60.3% 67,555 118,935 56.8% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 8,443 15,637 54.0% 11,353 22,482 50.5% Native American, Non-Hispanic 445 684 65.1% 764 1,522 50.2% Other, Non-Hispanic 1,595 3,338 47.8% 2,455 5,100 48.1% Total 80,870 159,165 50.8% 137,555 289,815 47.5% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 People 37,590 83,130 45.2% 63,800 156,420 40.8% Family households, 5+ People 19,315 27,093 71.3% 36,490 54,748 66.7% Non-family households 23,970 48,935 49.0% 37,270 78,640 47.4% Households Experiencing any of the Four Severe Housing Problems # with problems # of households % with problems # with problems # of households % with problems Race and Ethnicity White, Non-Hispanic 13,305 64,665 20.6% 23,600 126,010 18.7% Black, Non-Hispanic 5,290 13,775 38.4% 5,860 15,785 37.1% Hispanic 24,615 61,070 40.3% 44,840 118,935 37.7% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non- Hispanic 5,402 15,637 34.6% 7,121 22,482 31.7% Native American, Non-Hispanic 250 684 36.6% 429 1,522 28.2% Other, Non-Hispanic 960 3,338 28.8% 1,420 5,100 27.8% Total 49,810 159,165 31.3% 83,265 289,815 28.7% Note: All % represent a share of the total population, except household type and size, which is out of total households. Source: CHAS 82 TABLE 12. DEMOGRAPHICS OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH SEVERE HOUSING COST BURDENS Fresno City of Fresno Fresno Region # with problems # of Households % with problems # with problems # of households % with problems Race and Ethnicity White, Non-Hispanic 11,560 64,665 17.9% 20,185 126,010 16.0% Black, Non-Hispanic 4,595 13,775 33.4% 5,010 15,785 31.7% Hispanic 16,590 61,070 27.2% 28,520 118,935 24.0% Asian or Pacific Islander, Non-Hispanic 3,184 15,637 20.4% 4,270 22,482 19.0% Native American, Non- Hispanic 190 684 27.8% 310 1,522 20.4% Other, Non-Hispanic 715 3,338 21.4% 1,035 5,100 20.3% Total 36,834 159,165 23.1% 59,330 289,815 20.5% Household Type and Size Family households, <5 People 18,620 83,130 22.4% 29,804 156,420 19.1% Family households, 5+ People 5,770 27,093 21.3% 10,335 54,748 18.9% Non-family households 12,450 48,935 25.4% 19,170 78,640 24.4% Note: Severe housing cost burden is defined as greater than 50% of income. All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region, except household type and size, which is out of total households. The # households is the denominator for the % with problems and may differ from the # households for the table on severe housing problems. Source: CHAS 83 FIGURE 37. HOUSING BURDEN AND RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 84 FIGURE 38. HOUSING BURDENS AND NATIONAL ORIGIN IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 85 FIGURE 39. HOUSING BURDEN AND RACE AND ETHNICITY IN THE FRESNO REGION 86 FIGURE 40. HOUSING BURDENS AND NATIONAL ORIGIN IN THE FRESNO REGION 87 Homeownership and Lending Homeownership is vital to a community’s economic well-being. It allows the opportunity to build wealth, is generally associated with higher levels of civic engagement,27 and is correlated with positive cognitive and behavioral outcomes among children.28 Federal housing policies and discriminatory mortgage lending practices prior to the Fair Housing Act of 1968, along with continuing impediments to access, have had significant impacts on the homeownership rates of racial and ethnic minorities, particularly Black and Hispanic populations. The gap between the white and Black homeownership rate is the largest among racial and ethnic groups. In 2017, the U.S. Census Bureau reported a 21.6 percentage point gap in homeownership rate between white and Black households; just a 2.9 percentage point decrease since 1997.29 Homeownership trends have changed in recent years because of significant events in the housing market and labor force. The homeownership rate for Millennials (the generation born between 1981 and 1997) is 8 percentage points lower than the two previous generations, controlling for age. This discrepancy can be attributed to a multitude of factors ranging from preference to urban areas, cost of education and associated debt, changes in marriage and childbearing patterns, rising housing costs, and the current supply of affordable houses.30 Table 13 shows the number of owner and renter households, as well as the homeownership rate, by race and ethnicity for the city and region. In Fresno, 48% of households own their homes. The homeownership rate is highest for white households (62.2%), followed by other race households (52.8%) and Asian households (47.0%). About 38% of Hispanic households in the city own their homes, while Black and Native American households have the lowest homeownership rates at 27%. In Fresno County, homeownership rates are higher overall (53.8%) and for each racial and ethnic group. Again, however, African Americans have the lowest homeownership rate at 29.1%, less than half that of white households (67.8%). Homeowners in the city of Fresno are primarily located in pockets of the city. Strong homeownership occurs north of E. Nees Avenue and immediately south of N. Herndon Avenue in northeast Fresno, to the west of N. Fruit Avenue in northwest Fresno, immediately north of W. Clinton Avenue and in areas around N. Polk Avenue in west Fresno, south of E. Belmont Avenue in southeast Fresno, and along N. Fowler and S. Fowler Avenues in southeast Fresno. In these areas, homeownership rates generally exceed 70%. Several census tracts in northeast and northwest Fresno have homeownership rates that exceed 80%. 27 Manturuk K, Lindblad M, Quercia R. “Homeownership and civic engagement in low-income urban neighborhoods: a longitudinal analysis.” Urban Affairs Review. 2012;48(5):731–60. 28 Haurin, Donald R. et al. “The Impact of Homeownership on Child Outcomes.” Low-Income Homeownership Working Paper Series. Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. October 2001, http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/liho01-14.pdf. 29 U.S. Census Bureau. Homeownership Rates by Race and Ethnicity of Householder: 1994 to 2017. 30 Choi, Jung et al. “Millennial Homeownership: Why Is It So Low, and How Can We Increase It?” The Urban Institute. February 2000. https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/98729/millennial_homeownership_0.pdf 88 Renters in the city of Fresno, as shown in Figure 41, are mostly clustered in central Fresno, in parts of southeast Fresno along Sequoia Kings Canyon Freeway and near Fresno Pacific University, near Fresno State University in north Fresno, along Highway 41 from Shaw Avenue up to the Madera County line, in west Fresno between N. Fruit Avenue and E. Shields Avenue and in southwest Fresno between E. California and E. Church Avenues east of Hyde Park. These areas contain census tracts in which the percentage of renters exceeds 70%. Few census tracts have more than 80% renters. Areas where the percentage of renters exceeds 80% exist near the universities, and in the Pinedale neighborhood in north Fresno. Figures 43 and 44 indicate that renters are more predominant in west Fresno County. The percentage of renters exceeds 90% in those census tracts surrounding the Lemoore Naval Air Station. Conversely, homeownership is more prevalent in east Fresno County. County census tract 59.12 east of the City of Clovis has a homeownership rate of 93%. Census tracts north of E. Kings Canyon, extending to the county line, have homeownership rates exceeding 75%. Census tracts adjacent to southeast Fresno also have rates of homeownership that exceed, in some cases, 80%. TABLE 13. HOMEOWNERSHIP AND RENTAL RATES BY RACE AND ETHNICITY Race/Ethnicity City of Fresno Fresno Region Owner Households Renter House holds Home- ownership Rate Owner Househ olds Renter Households Home- ownership Rate Non-Hispanic White 40,220 24,440 62.2% 85,375 40,635 67.8% Black 3,725 10,045 27.1% 4,590 11,185 29.1% Asian 7,355 8,290 47.0% 11,900 10,580 52.9% Native American 190 495 27.7% 515 1,005 33.9% Other 1,765 1,580 52.8% 2,990 2,100 58.7% Hispanic 23,080 37,980 37.8% 50,495 68,450 42.5% Total 76,335 82,830 48.0% 155,860 133,955 53.8% Note: Data presented are number of households, not individuals. Source: CHAS 89 FIGURE 41. SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE RENTERS IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 90 FIGURE 42. SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE OWNERS IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 91 FIGURE 43. SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE RENTERS IN THE FRESNO REGION 92 FIGURE 44. SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE OWNERS IN THE FRESNO REGION 93 Mortgage Lending Prospective homebuyers need access to mortgage credit, and programs that offer homeownership should be available without discrimination. The proceeding data and analysis assesses the degree to which the housing needs of local residents are being met by home loan lenders. The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 (HMDA) requires most mortgage lending institutions to disclose detailed information about their home-lending activities annually. The objectives of the HMDA include ensuring that borrowers and loan applicants are receiving fair treatment in the home loan market. The national 2017 HMDA data consists of information for 12.1 million home loan applications reported by 5,852 home lenders, including banks, savings associations, credit unions, and mortgage companies.31 HMDA data, which is provided by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC), includes the type, purpose, and characteristics of each home mortgage application that lenders receive during the calendar year. It also includes additional data related to those applications including loan pricing information, action taken, property location (by census tract), and information about loan applicants such as sex, race, ethnicity, and income. The source for this analysis is tract-level HMDA data for census tracts wholly or partially within the city of Fresno for the years 2013 to 2017, which includes a total of 29,634 home purchase loan application records.32 Within each record, some data variables are 100% reported: “Loan Type,” “Loan Amount,” and “Action Taken,” for example, but other data fields are less complete. According to the HMDA data, these records represent applications taken entirely by mail, Internet, or phone in which the applicant declined to identify their sex, race and/or ethnicity. Missing race, ethnicity, and sex data are potentially problematic for an assessment of discrimination. If the missing data are non-random there may be adverse impacts on the accuracy of the analysis. Ideally, any missing data for a specific data variable would affect a small proportion of the total number of loan records and therefore would have only a minimal effect on the results. Of total Fresno mortgage loan applications during the five-year time period examined, about 9.8% were denied. There is no requirement for reporting reasons for a loan denial, and this information was not provided from about 23.1% of denials. Further, the HMDA data does not include a borrower’s total financial qualifications such as an actual credit score, property type and value, loan-to-value ratio, or loan product choices. Research has shown that differences in denial rates among racial or ethnic groups can arise from these credit-related factors not 31 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. “FFIEC Announces Availability of 2017 Data on Mortgage Lending.” May 7, 2018. https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/ffiec-announces-availability-2017-data-mortgage- lending/ 32 Includes applications for the purchase of one-to-four family dwellings (not including manufactured housing) in which the property will be occupied as the owner’s principal dwelling and in which the mortgage will be secured as first lien. Includes applications for conventional, FHA-insured, VA-guaranteed, and FSA/RHS-guaranteed loans. 94 available in the HMDA data.33 Despite these limitations, the HMDA data play an important role in fair lending enforcement. Bank examiners frequently use HMDA data in conjunction with information from loan files to assess an institution’s compliance with fair lending laws. Complete information about applicant race, ethnicity, and income is available for 27,301 purchase loan applications, or about 92.1% of all applications. Roughly 40% of applications were by white applicants and another 40% by Hispanic or Latino applicants. Asians constituted 14.2% of the pool, African Americans made up 3.6% and applicants of other races, 1.5%. Compared to overall population shares, this breakdown indicates that white households are overrepresented among loan applicants relative to their population citywide (41.6% versus 30.8%), as are Asian households (14.2% versus 12.1%). In contrast, Hispanic and Black residents make up smaller shares of the loan applicant pool than they do the city’s population (39.0% versus 46.7% for Latinos and 3.6% versus 7.4% for African Americans). Table 14 shows loan approval rates for completed loan applications by race and ethnicity at various income levels.34 Not included in these figures are applications that were withdrawn or closed due to incompleteness such that no decision was made regarding approval or denial. At each income level, applicants of color have higher purchase loan denial rates than white applicants. At low incomes, loan denial rates range from 14.0% for white households to rates of 19.6% for Asian applicants, 21.4% for Black applicants, and 24.5% for applicants of other races. At middle incomes, white applicants again had the lowest denial rate (8.4%), while African American and other race applicants saw higher denial rates (13.3% and 15.5%, respectively). At higher incomes, disparities between loan approval rates for white, African American, and other race borrowers persisted. About 7% of white households were denied a home loan compared to 12.8% of other race applicants and 15.3% of Black applicants. Overall, disregarding income, about 8% of white applicant were denied a loan, compared to 12% of Asian and Latino applicants and 15% of Black and other race applicants. These gaps indicate that households of color, particularly African American households, continue to have reduced access to homeownership – they are less likely to apply for mortgage loans than white households and less likely to have those loan applications approved. This data suggests avenues for expanding access to homeownership, including homebuyer readiness classes or other assistance, downpayment assistance programs, and support for households in the process of applying for a loan. The City of Fresno can also meet with local lenders to inform them of goals for furthering fair housing, discuss lending patterns related to homeownership identified in this AI, and build potential partnerships for expanding access to mortgages. 33 R. B. Avery, Bhutta N., Brevoort K.P., and Canne, G.B. 2012. “The Mortgage Market in 2011: Highlights from the Data Reported Under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act.” Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Federal Reserve Bulletin, Vol. 98, No. 6. 34 The low-income category includes applicants with a household income at or below 80% of area median family income (MFI). The middle income range includes applicants with household incomes from 81% to 150% MFI, and the upper income category consists of applicants with a household income above 150% MFI. 95 TABLE 14. LOAN APPROVAL RATES BY RACE AND ETHNICITY IN CITY OF FRESNO, 2013 – 2017 Applicant Income Applicant Race and Ethnicity All Applican ts Non-Latino Latino White Black Asian Other Home Purchase Loans Low Income Completed Applications 1,150 112 652 53 2,759 4,726 Denial Rate 14.0% 21.4% 19.6% 24.5% 16.5% 16.5% Middle Income Completed Applications 3,915 406 1,533 155 4,325 10,334 Denial Rate 8.4% 13.3% 11.4% 15.5% 10.7% 10.1% High Income Completed Applications 5,036 326 1,158 148 2,190 8,858 Denial Rate 7.1% 15.3% 10.7% 12.8% 9.4% 8.5% All Applicants Completed Applications 10,101 844 3,343 356 9,274 23,918 Denial Rate 8.4% 15.2% 12.7% 15.7% 12.1% 10.8% Note: “Completed applications” includes applications that were approved but not accepted, denied, and approved with a loan originated. It does not included applications withdrawn by the applicant or closed for incompleteness. Data Source: FFIEC 2013-2017 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data, Accessed via www.consumerfinance.gov/data-research/hmda 96 Evictions and Housing Instability According to the 2019 Report, Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates, there were approximately 2,342 evictions in the city of Fresno in 2016. Evictions are a critical variable in housing instability, not only because tenants lose their current housing in an eviction, but because evictions can be costly and can impact one’s rental history. In Fresno County, evictions remain in legal records for 7 years, and can negatively impact future housing opportunities. The primary cause for eviction, as noted by the researchers, was failure to pay rent. Of those tenants in the study who were evicted due to non-payment, over 80% owed no more than one month’s rent plus fees when an unlawful detainer lawsuit was brought against them. Other causes for evictions observed in the study included domestic disturbances, guests living in the unit beyond the allotted time for individuals not on the lease, unauthorized pets, and substance abuse or suspicion of the sale of substances. The report indicates that rates of eviction have statistically significant correlation with other factors related to poverty (see Table 15 and Figure 45). Census block groups with the lowest median household incomes in Fresno had eviction rates three times higher than block groups with the highest median household incomes. Furthermore, census block groups with high rates of severe cost burden had an eviction rate of 3.2%, more than twice the eviction rate of census block groups with low cost burden (1.4%) (see Table 16 and Figure 46). TABLE 15. POVERTY RATE AND EVICTION RATE, FRESNO COUNTY, 2016 FIGURE 45. NEIGHBORHOOD EVICTION RATES AND NEIGHBORHOOD POVERTY RATES BY BLOCK GROUP, CITY OF FRESNO, 2016 Neighborhood Poverty Rate Number of Neighborhoods Percent of Neighborhoods Average Eviction Rate 0-10% (Low) 175 29.7% 1.6% 10-30% (Moderate) 202 34.3% 1.8% 30-50% (High) 145 24.6% 2.3% Over 50% (Severe) 67 11.4% 3.2% Data Source: Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates (2019) 97 TABLE 16. RENT BURDEN AND EVICTION RATE, FRESNO COUNTY, 2016 FIGURE 46. EVICTION RATES AND AVERAGE RENT BURDEN BY BLOCK GROUP, CITY OF FRESNO, 2016 Areas with the lowest median household incomes, as identified in the report, were located in south and southwest Fresno. These areas are predominantly populated by Hispanic, Asian and Black residents. The eviction rate in non-white Fresno neighborhoods was 2.2% compared to 1.6% in majority white neighborhoods.35 It should be noted, however, that CHAS data indicates a large number of severely cost burdened Hispanic households in Fresno as well as white households. Therefore, one’s neighborhood might serve as a stronger determinant of eviction than one’s race or ethnicity. Given the impact of eviction on an individual’s housing opportunities, including the quality of housing, one eviction can initiate a cycle of housing instability for years into the future. Furthermore, evictions in Fresno have their strongest hold in neighborhoods populated by racial and ethnic minorities. Domestic violence is also a major destabilizing factor for Fresno households. Incidents of domestic violence can leave individuals and families without a safe place to live, bringing some victims of domestic violence under a larger umbrella of homeless persons. Fresno has an especially high rate of domestic violence incidents. According to data from Open Justice, a criminal justice database published by the California Department of Justice, Fresno has one of the highest rates of domestic-violence related calls for a city of its size. In 2018, Fresno had 35 Nkosi, Janine, Amber R. Crowell, Patience Milrod, Veronica Garibay, and Ashley Werner. 2019. Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates. Report prepared on behalf of Faith in the Valley, p. 15. Average Rent Burden Number of Neighborhoods Percent of Neighborhoods Average Eviction Rate 0-30% (Low) 182 33.5% 1.4% 30-50% (High) 288 52.9% 2.0% Over 50% (Severe) 74 13.6% 3.2% Data Source: Evicted in Fresno: Facts for Housing Advocates (2019) 98 5,499 domestic violence-related calls compared to 1,744 calls in Sacramento, a city with a similarly sized population.36 The Marjaree Mason Center, which operates Fresno’s largest domestic violence safe houses, discusses domestic violence in context of Fresno County in its 2014-2017 Strategic Plan. The report states that low-income residents are most likely to utilize police services to handle domestic disputes, although domestic violence occurs at all income levels. Major risk factors for domestic violence, as indicated in the report, include poverty, unemployment, substance abuse and poor education.37 The plan also acknowledges that the region’s agricultural labor market attracts low-income, limited English proficiency, and undocumented workers who may be more reluctant to report domestic violence to police but still require services. Stakeholders from the Marjaree Mason Center note that the average client in a safe house is a 32 to 34-year-old adult with 2 children. Individuals and families who are victims of domestic violence require emergency shelter and transitional housing services once their home is no longer safe. Furthermore, diversion and early intervention programs, such as housing navigation, are critical resources to ensure that victims of domestic violence can find safe and stable alternative housing as early as possible. Zoning, Affordability, and Housing Choice Comprehensive land use planning is a critical process by which communities address a myriad of public policy issues such as housing, transportation, health, recreation, environmental protection, commercial and retail services, and land values, and address how the interconnection and complexity of these issues can ultimately impact the entire municipality. “The land use decisions made by a community shape its very character – what it’s like to walk through, what it’s like to drive through, who lives in it, what kinds of jobs and businesses exist in it, how well the natural environment survives, and whether the community is an attractive one or an ugly one.”38 Likewise, decisions regarding land use and zoning have a direct and profound impact on affordable housing and fair housing choice, shaping a community or region’s potential diversity, growth, and opportunity for all. Zoning determines where housing can be built, the type of housing that is allowed, and the amount and density of housing that can be provided. Zoning also can directly or indirectly affect the cost of developing housing, making it harder or easier to accommodate affordable housing. The following sections will explore (i) how federal and California state law impact local land use and zoning authority and decision-making and (ii) how the zoning and land use codes of the City of Fresno impact housing affordability and fair housing choice. 36 Open Justice. Domestic Violence-Related Calls for Assistance. Retrieved from: https://openjustice.doj.ca.gov/exploration/crime-statistics/domestic-violence-related-calls-assistance 37 Marjaree Mason Center. 2015. 2014-2017 Strategic Plan. Retrieved from: https://mmcenter.org/sites/default/files/2015-finalstrategicplan.pdf, p. 6. 38 John M. Levy. Contemporary Urban Planning, Eighth Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2009. 99 Intersection of Local Zoning with Federal and State Fair Housing Laws From a regulatory standpoint, local government measures to control land use typically rely upon zoning codes, subdivision codes, and housing and building codes, in conjunction with comprehensive plans. Courts have long recognized the power of local governments to control land use, and the California Constitution and Government Code authorize incorporated counties and cities to regulate land use and zoning within their respective jurisdictions. This general grant of home-rule authority is limited by other state code sections (e.g., the General Code, Health and Safety Code, and Public Resources Code) related to public hearings and procedures; density bonuses and incentives; environmental impact reviews; development impact fees; mediation and resolution of land use disputes; transportation management; affordable housing development approvals; subdivision maps; use of surplus land; and supportive housing and residential care facilities, among others. To try to tackle the state’s ever-growing housing affordability crisis, in 2019, California legislators introduced a menu of ambitious bills that would override elements of local zoning control. However, many of these bills faced significant political opposition. Some noteworthy bills that did pass and were signed into law by Governor Newsom include a bill requiring faster approvals for housing and zoning changes; a statewide ban on downzoning; and a statewide ban on housing moratoriums or population caps.39 The state’s Density Bonus Law,40 which mandates that local governments grant density bonuses and other development concessions and incentives to qualifying housing developments that provide affordable housing, also was amended to provide up to an 80% density bonus for 100% affordable housing (amending the previous version which provided a sliding scale of up to a 35% bonus) and no density limits at all within half mile of a major transit stop for affordable housing.41 Another land use bill requires by right zoning approval of homeless shelters.42 The slate of bills passed and signed into law also affect housing providers’/landlords’ obligations and rights, including by limiting evictions to “just causes” (such as a tenant’s failure to pay rent, using the unit for criminal activity, repeated nuisances, major renovation, or demolition) and also sets a statewide limit on annual rent increases.43 California’s planning and land use regulations also require that each jurisdiction adopt “a comprehensive, long-term general plan for [its] physical development.” The General Plan is the jurisdiction’s official policy regarding the location of housing, business, industry, roads, parks, and other land uses, protection of the public from noise and other environmental hazards, and conservation of natural resources. The General Plan may be supplemented by “community plans” and “specific plans” to guide the land use decisions for particular areas or communities within the jurisdiction and describe allowable land uses, identify open space, and detail the availability of facilities, infrastructure, and financing available for the community. The jurisdiction 39 SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, to amend Section 65589.5 of, to amend, repeal, and add Sections 65940, 65943, and 65950 of, to add and repeal Sections 65905.5, 65913.10, and 65941.1 of, and to add and repeal Chapter 12 (commencing with Section 66300) of Division 1 of Title 7 of, the Government Code, relating to housing. 40 California Government Code Sections 65915 – 65918. 41 AB 1763, to amend Section 65915 of the Government Code. 42 AB 48, to amend Section 65583 of, and to add and repeal Article 12 (commencing with Section 65660) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of, the Government Code, relating to housing. 43 AB 1482, to add and repeal Sections 1946.2, 1947.12, and 1947.13 of the Civil Code, relating to tenancy. 100 may then adopt zoning or development codes, subdivision codes, and other planning ordinances to carry out the policies of its general plan consistent with other state mandates. The City of Fresno last adopted an updated General Plan 44 in December 2014 and a new Development Code (zoning ordinance) on December 3, 2015, with a new focus on prioritizing growth, reinvestment, and infill development in the Downtown core and transit corridors. A new Zoning Map became effective March 7, 2016, to bring consistency to the General Plan’s Land Use Map with the Development Code. The City’s aim for the new Zoning Map also was to remove as a barrier to development the expensive and time-consuming rezoning process previously required for most new development projects. One goal of zoning is to balance individual property rights and free market forces with the power of government to promote and protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the overall community. Zoning codes regulate how a parcel of land in a community may be used and the density of development. Local governments may divide their jurisdiction into zoning districts by adopting a zoning map consistent with the general plan; define categories of permitted and special/conditional uses for those districts; and establish design or performance standards for those uses. Zoning may regulate the height, shape, and placement of structures and lot sizes or shapes. Jurisdictions also can expressly prohibit certain types of uses within zoning districts.45 In this way, local ordinances may define the type and density of housing resources available to residents, developers, and other organizations within certain areas, and as a result influence the availability and affordability of housing. In Fresno, the Development Code (Chapter 15 of the Code of Ordinances) divides the city into 29 primary zoning districts, including 6 single family dwelling districts, 3 multifamily dwelling districts, one mobile/manufactured home district, 3 mixed-use and 3 downtown residential districts, plus overlay zones (mostly related to historic and environmental resources protection). The code describes allowable uses and development standards in each district, to implement the long-range planning goals of the General Plan. Three decision making bodies are responsible for the administration and implementation of the Development Code: City Council, the Planning Commission, and the Development and Resource Management Director (the “Director”) (with recommendations from the Historic Preservation Commission and Council District Project Review Committees). While local governments have the power to enact zoning and land use regulations, that power is limited by state and federal fair housing laws (e.g., the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and the Unruh Act, the federal FHAA, the Americans with Disabilities Act, constitutional due process and equal protection), which apply not only to private individuals but also to government actions. The FHAA prohibits both private individuals and government authorities from denying a member of a protected class equal access to housing, including 44 See Fresno’s 2014 General Plan, Ch. 11 Housing Element available at: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp- content/uploads/sites/10/2019/07/General-Plan-11-Housing-Element-Consistency-7-19.pdf. 45 Local government power to regulate land use derives from the State's expressly delegated police power, first to municipal governments and then to counties, as found in the various enabling statues of the state constitution and Title 7 of the California Government Code, § 65000 et seq. State law requires local planning agencies to prepare and “the legislative body of each county and city shall adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city.” See Gov. Code § 65300 et seq. 101 through the enforcement of a local zoning ordinance that disproportionately limits housing choice for protected persons. In Texas Department of Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, a 2015 landmark disparate impact case under the FHA, the Supreme Court affirmed that part of the FHA’s central purpose is to eradicate discriminatory housing practices, including specifically unlawful zoning laws and other housing restrictions. Besides intentional discrimination and disparate treatment, discrimination under the FHA also includes: [A] refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford such person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. FHA § 804(f)(3)(b). This provision has been held to apply to zoning and land use decisions by local governments. California has adopted a parallel version of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, (the “Fair Housing Act,” “FHA” or “FHAA”), known as the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) (Cal. Gov. Code § 12900 - 12996). Both the FHAA and FEHA prohibit discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housing-related transactions, based on sex (which under the FEHA also includes specifically pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding or medical conditions related to pregnancy, childbirth or breastfeeding), race, color, disability (physical and mental), religion, national origin, or familial status (families with children). California has a broader definition of “disability” than federal civil rights acts. In California, disability includes physical or mental impairments that “limit a major life activity” as opposed to the federal definition which requires that the disabling condition “substantially limit” one or more major life activities. The FEHA also expands on the classes of persons protected against discriminatory housing practices to also prohibit discrimination in housing based on gender, gender identity, and gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, age, source of income, genetic information, and retaliation for protesting illegal discrimination, or “any other basis prohibited by Section 51 of the Civil Code,” which also includes as a basis of protection medical condition, citizenship, primary language, and immigration status. “Source of income” is defined narrowly under the FEHA as “lawful, verifiable income paid directly to a tenant or paid to a representative of a tenant” and under the definition “a landlord is not considered a representative of a tenant.” Accordingly, source of income under the FEHA has been adjudged to not include government rent subsidies, specifically Housing Choice Vouchers under Sec. 8 of the FHA. While the FEHA does not prevent a landlord from refusing to accept tenants who rely on Section 8 vouchers, the California Court of Appeals has found that a local ordinance that specifically protects against discrimination based on a tenant’s participation in the Section 8 program is not preempted by the state law. Fresno did not have a local ordinance protecting tenants relying on Section 8. Because the number of voucher holders often far outnumbers available rental units in an area, in 2019, the state legislature passed, and the governor signed into law, a separate statewide bill that makes it unlawful for landlords to refuse 102 a tenant because that tenant’s source of payment relies on subsidies or participation in Section 8.46 The FEHA prohibits discrimination and harassment in all aspects of housing, including sales and rentals, evictions, terms and conditions, mortgage loans and insurance, and land use and zoning. California’s fair housing law has fewer exemptions than its federal counterpart. An owner-occupied single-family home, where the owner does not rent to more than one individual (as opposed to owner-occupied buildings with no more than four units under the FHAA) and complies with FEHA's prohibition against discriminatory statements, notices, or advertisements, is one of the few exemptions under the FEHA. Exemptions also apply to housing operated by organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy to members and statements indicating a preference for same-sex roommates in shared living situations. The FEHA explicitly prohibits discriminatory “public or private land use practices, decisions and authorizations” including, but not limited to, “zoning laws, denials of permits, and other [land use] actions . . . that make housing opportunities unavailable” to protected groups. Like the FHAA, it requires housing providers to make reasonable accommodation in rules and practices to permit persons with disabilities to use and enjoy a dwelling and to allow persons with disabilities to make reasonable modifications of the premises. Under California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, all persons are entitled to full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all “business establishments,” including both private and public entities. The Unruh Act has been consistently construed to apply to rental housing, and is an additional claim often averred in housing discrimination cases. The Unruh Civil Rights Act protects all persons against arbitrary and unreasonable discrimination by a business establishment. Despite state law generally leaving zoning and land use regulations to local decision-making, the FEHA explicitly preempts any local ordinance that conflicts with the categories of housing discrimination specifically set forth in the statute. Fresno has not adopted a local nondiscrimination ordinance or expanded on the rights and obligations already guaranteed by the FEHA or Unruh Civil Rights Act. City of Fresno Zoning Ordinance Review Although comprehensive plans and zoning and land use codes play an important role in regulating the health and safety of the structural environment, overly restrictive codes can negatively impact housing affordability and fair housing choice within a jurisdiction. Examples of zoning provisions that most commonly result in barriers to fair housing choice include: • Restrictive forms of land use that exclude any specific form of housing, particularly multi- family housing, or that require large lot sizes or low-density that deter affordable housing development by limiting its economic feasibility; 46 SB 329, signed Oct. 8, 2019, to amend Sections 12927 and 12955 of the Government Code, relating to discrimination. 103 • Restrictive definitions of family that impede unrelated individuals from sharing a dwelling unit; • Placing administrative and siting constraints on group homes for persons with disabilities; • Restrictions making it difficult for residents with disabilities to locate housing in certain neighborhoods or to modify their housing; • Restrictions on occupancy of alternative sources of affordable housing such as accessory dwellings, mobile homes, and mixed-use structures. Fresno’s treatment of these types of issues, mainly through its Development Code, is explored and evaluated in Table 17 and the narrative below. Because zoning codes present a crucial area of analysis for a study of impediments to fair housing choice, the latest available Development Code and land use ordinances of the City were reviewed and evaluated against a list of ten common fair housing issues. Taken together, these issues give a picture of (1) the degree to which exclusionary zoning provisions may impact affordable housing opportunities within the jurisdiction and (2) the degree to which the zoning code may impact housing opportunities for persons with disabilities. The zoning ordinance was assigned a risk score of either 1, 2, or 3 for each of the ten issues and was then given an aggregate score calculated by averaging the individual scores, with the possible scores defined as follows: 1 = low risk – the provision poses little risk for discrimination or limitation of fair housing choice, or is an affirmative action that intentionally promotes and/or protects affordable housing and fair housing choice; 2 = medium risk – the provision is neither among the most permissive nor most restrictive; while it could complicate fair housing choice, its effect is not likely to be widespread; 3 = high risk – the provision causes or has potential to result in systematic and widespread housing discrimination or the limitation of fair housing choice or is an issue for which the jurisdiction could take affirmative action to further affordable housing or fair housing choice but has not. The following chart lists the ten issues reviewed and the scores for each issue. A complete report including citations to relevant statutes, code sections, and explanatory comments, are included as an appendix to this document. 104 TABLE 17. ZONING CODE RISK SCORES Issue Risk Score 1a. Does the jurisdiction’s definition of “family” have the effect of preventing unrelated individuals from sharing the same residence? Is the definition unreasonably restrictive? 1b. Does the definition of “family” discriminate against or treat differently unrelated individuals with disabilities (or members of any other protected class)? 1 2a. Does the zoning code treat housing for individuals with disabilities (e.g. group homes, congregate living homes, supportive services housing, personal care homes, etc.) differently from other single family residential and multifamily residential uses? For example, is such housing only allowed in certain residential districts, must a special or conditional use permit be granted before siting such housing in certain residential districts, etc.? 2b. Does the zoning ordinance unreasonably restrict housing opportunities for individuals with disabilities who require onsite supportive services? Or is housing for individuals with disabilities allowed in the same manner as other housing in residential districts? 1 3a. Do the jurisdiction’s policies, regulations, and/or zoning ordinances provide a process for persons with disabilities to seek reasonable modifications or reasonable accommodations to zoning, land use, or other regulatory requirements? 3b. Does the jurisdiction require a public hearing to obtain public input for specific exceptions to zoning and land-use rules for applicants with disabilities? If so, is the public hearing process only required for applicants seeking housing for persons with disabilities or required for all applicants? 1 4. Does the ordinance impose spacing or dispersion requirements on certain protected housing types? 1 5. Does the jurisdiction restrict any inherently residential uses protected by fair housing laws (such as residential substance abuse treatment facilities) only to non- residential zones? 1 6. Does the jurisdiction’s zoning and land use rules constitute exclusionary zoning that precludes development of affordable or low-income housing by imposing unreasonable residential design regulations (such as high minimum lot sizes, wide street frontages, large setbacks, low FARs, large minimum building square footage or large livable floor areas, restrictions on number of bedrooms per unit, and/or low maximum building heights)? 1 105 Issue Risk Score 7. Does the zoning ordinance fail to provide residential districts where multi-family housing is permitted as of right? Are multifamily dwellings excluded from all single- family dwelling districts? 7b. Do multi-family districts restrict development only to low-density housing types? 1 8. Are unreasonable restrictions placed on the construction, rental, or occupancy of alternative types of affordable or low-income housing (for example, accessory dwellings or mobile/manufactured homes)? 1 9a. Are the jurisdiction’s design and construction requirements (as contained in the zoning ordinance or building code) congruent with the Fair Housing Amendments Act’s accessibility standards for design and construction? 9b. Is there any provision for monitoring compliance? 1 10. Does the zoning ordinance include an inclusionary zoning provision or provide any incentives for the development of affordable housing or housing for protected classes? 1 Average Risk Score 1.0 The City’s average risk score (calculated by taking the average of the 10 individual issue scores) is 1.0, indicating that overall there is low risk of the development code and other land use regulations contributing to discriminatory housing treatment or impeding fair housing choice. In most cases, the Development Code and other land use code sections are reasonably permissive and allow for flexibility as to the most common fair housing issues. Remarkably, the City did not receive a “2” (medium risk) or “3” (high risk) score on any of the ten issues evaluated. While facially Fresno’s code does not put it in jeopardy of violating the minimum fair housing and AFFH standards as they relate to local government land use regulations and policies, even well-scoring jurisdictions must also work to apply their land use codes and policies in an equitable manner. Additionally, there are always incremental improvements to be made to rules and policies to more fully protect the fair housing rights and housing choice of all of the City’s residents and to better fulfill the mandate to affirmatively further fair housing. The restriction of housing choice for certain historically/socio-economically disadvantaged groups and protected classes can happen in any number of ways and should be viewed on a continuum. The zoning analysis matrix developed for this report and the narrative below are not designed to assert whether the City’s code creates a per se violation of the FHA or HUD regulations, but are meant as a tool to highlight significant areas where zoning and land use ordinances may otherwise jeopardize the spirit and intent of fair housing protections and HUD’s AFFH standards for its entitlement communities. The issues chosen for discussion show where zoning ordinances and policies could go further to protect fair housing choice for protected and disadvantaged classes, and yet still fulfill the zoning objective of protecting the public’s health, safety, and general welfare. Specifically, the 106 issues highlighted by the matrix inform, first, the degree to which the zoning ordinance may be overly restrictive and exclusionary to the point of artificially limiting the affordable housing inventory and directly contributing to higher housing and rental costs. And secondly, the matrix helps inform the impact the local regulations may have on housing opportunities for persons with disabilities, a protected class under state and federal fair housing law. Impact of Zoning Provisions on Affordable Housing Academic and market research have proven what also is intuitive: land use regulations can directly limit the supply of housing units within a given jurisdiction, and thus contribute to making housing more expensive, i.e. less affordable.47 Exclusionary zoning is understood to mean zoning regulations which impose unreasonable residential design regulations that are not congruent with the actual standards necessary to protect the health and safety of current average household sizes and prevent overcrowding. Zoning policies that impose barriers to housing development by making developable land and construction costlier than they are inherently can take different forms and may include: high minimum lot sizes, low density allowances, wide street frontages, large setbacks, low floor area ratios, large minimum building square footage or large livable floor areas, restrictions on number of bedrooms per unit, low maximum building heights, restrictions against infill development, restrictions on the types of housing that may be constructed in certain residential zones, arbitrary or antiquated historic preservation standards, minimum off-street parking requirements, restrictions against residential conversions to multi-unit buildings, lengthy permitting processes, development impact fees, and/or restrictions on accessory dwelling units. The Brookings Institution has found that “[o]n roughly 75% of land in most cities today, it is illegal to build anything except single-family detached houses. The origins of single-family zoning in America are not benign: Many housing codes used density as a proxy for separating people by income and race.”48 Although today it may be difficult to prove that a zoning ordinance’s preference for single family zoning is facially (or intentionally) discriminatory in direct violation of fair housing laws, such land use regulations still may have the effect of artificially limiting the supply of housing units in a given area and disproportionately reducing housing choice for moderate to low-income families, minorities, persons with disabilities on fixed incomes, families with children, and other protected classes by making the development of affordable housing cost prohibitive. Legitimate public objectives, such as maintaining the residential character of established neighborhoods, environmental protection, or public health, must be balanced with housing needs and availability. 47 See Gyourko, Joseph, Albert Saiz, and Anita A. Summers, A New Measure of the Local Regulatory Environment for Housing Markets: The Wharton Residential Land Use Regulatory Index (2007), available at real.wharton.upenn.edu; Randal O’Toole, The Planning Penalty: How Smart Growth Makes Housing Unaffordable (2006), available at independent.org/pdf/policy_reports/2006-04-03-housing.pdf; Edward L. Glaeser and Joseph Gyourko, The Impact of Zoning on Housing Affordability (2002), available at law.yale.edu/system/files/documents/pdf/hier1948.pdf; The White House’s Housing Development Toolkit, 2016, available at whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/images/Housing_Development_Toolkit%20f.2.pdf. 48 Baca, Alex, “Gentle” Density Can Save Our Neighborhoods, Dec. 4, 2019, available at https://www.brookings.edu/research/gentle-density-can-save-our-neighborhoods. 107 When Fresno drafted and adopted its current General Plan in 2014 (along with a Housing Element Amendment in 2017), it recommended large-scale rezones to allow for both more housing units and greater diversity of housing types, infill development, and use of vacant land for residential uses. The City then adopted a new Development Code and updated Zoning Map in 2015 and 2016, respectively, to be more consistent with the policy goals of the General Plan related to housing and to codify those rezonings. With the General Plan’s Housing Element Amendment and rezonings implemented through the new Development Code and Zoning Map, Fresno shifted from a preference for single-family detached housing to residential and mixed-use zones that allow more density and housing type diversity. The Development Code and Zoning Map, however, still maintain single family detached only zoning districts (RE, RS-1, RS-2, and RS-3)—with no duplexes, townhomes, triplexes, row homes, garden homes, zero lot line dwellings, or the like. (Accessory/Secondary dwelling units are permitted, however, in all single-family districts. See description below regarding Issue 8 of the matrix.) In the RS-4 district, single family attached dwellings are a conditional use. In the RS-5 district, single family attached dwellings and cottage housing are permitted by right uses; duplexes and multi-unit dwellings require conditional use permit approval. For each district, the City has established a density limit, minimum lot size, minimum setbacks, maximum lot coverage, maximum height of 35 feet, and other development controls. The Development Code and Zoning Map divide single-family zoning into 6 districts with a range of densities (up to 12 units/acre, without density bonus) and minimum lot sizes ranging from 5 acres in the RE district; 36,000 sq. ft. in the RS-1 district; 20,000 sq. ft. in the RS-2 district; 9,000 sq. ft. in the RS-3 district; 5,000 sq. ft. in the RS-4; and 4,000 sq. ft. in the RS-5 district. To promote more density and infill development the RS-3, RS-4, and RS-5 districts also have maximum lot size requirements. In the RM-1 multifamily district, single family detached, single family attached, duplexes, and cottage housing (as well as multifamily) are permitted uses under the same RS-5 lot and design standards. Single family attached and duplexes also are permitted in the RM-2 district, and duplexes are permitted by right in the RM-3 district. Cottage housing developments, also known as “pocket neighborhoods,” are a group of 4 to 12 single-family homes, between 600 and 1,200 square feet, that are arranged in common relation to one another, usually surrounding a shared landscaped area. Cottage housing, permitted in the RS-5 and RM-1 districts, can be built at a density of up to 1.33% of the number of units permitted in the underlying district. The cottage housing option allows more diversity in housing options and infill development opportunities while protecting the character of single-family neighborhoods. While any development standards place some degree of artificial pressure on the cost of housing and limit housing diversity, density, and socioeconomic integration within many desirable neighborhoods, and some of Fresno’s low and very-low density single-family districts have more barriers to affordable housing development, with the range of densities and housing types permitted in the medium and high density districts, opportunity for density bonuses (see Issue 10) and infill development, and vacant or underdeveloped land available 108 (see Housing Element of the General Plan) overall Fresno’s zoning code should not unreasonably exclude development of affordable single family dwelling types within the City. Because of the recent amendments to the Housing Element and Development Code/Map, Fresno received a “1/low risk” score on Issue 6 of the matrix related to exclusionary zoning. Exclusionary zoning can happen on a continuum and there is more the City can do to use zoning and land use policies to further remove artificial barriers to development of and access to affordable housing across all residential zones. While Fresno is not the most restrictive, there are, however, opportunities for greater flexibility to encourage more affordable housing development in the traditionally single-family districts. Allowing more housing units in the single-family districts can bring down average housing prices as it spreads the cost of land across more homes and creates more supply in the housing market. This can be accomplished in a variety of ways; for instance, by permitting or incentivizing conversion of large single-family dwellings or replacement of detached dwellings on large lots to attached dwellings, 2-family, 3-family, or low density multifamily dwellings compatible in physical scale with single-family dwellings. Other tools include lowering the minimum lot size requirements and relaxing other development controls like minimum lot widths and setbacks, maximum height allowances, etc. Or to assuage concerns about changing the established physical character of a neighborhood, general requirements about height, yard space, and architectural elements can remain unchanged in those zones, making attached and alternative housing types less daunting for neighbors. Other alternatives to large lot sizes may include cluster developments, density blending, zero lot line developments (rowhouses, garden homes, patio homes, and townhomes), and transfer of development rights in appropriate locations. The City could follow the example of cities such as Minneapolis, which has up-zoned every residential zoning district to eliminate single-family detached only zones. Allowing duplexes and triplexes on what had been single-family lots theoretically can double or triple housing capacity in many neighborhoods. Relaxing exclusionary land use standards citywide may not be a silver bullet to solving the housing shortage and affordability crisis many jurisdictions around the state and country face, but over time can make allowance for incremental improvements and alleviate the local government’s own complicity in the problem. Besides the rezonings to an RM multifamily category recommended by the General Plan update, it also called for some commercial and office zoned lands suitable for residential developments to be rezoned to a new Mixed-Use or Downtown category that allows for both residential and commercial/office uses. Three Downtown Districts were created for the urban core in 2016: DTC (Downtown Core), DTG (Downtown General), and DTN (Downtown Neighborhood). The new Downtown standards allow for the development of fully residential projects and establish unlimited residential densities and intensity (floor-to-area ratio) at building heights up to 15 stories. In the city’s core, the City provides reduced application fees and priority processing for single and multifamily projects. The Mixed-Use regulations were implemented to promote pedestrian-oriented infill development, intensification, and reuse of land with ground- floor neighborhood retail uses and upper-level multifamily housing and a mix of small lot single- family attached houses and townhomes. 109 The Development Code and Zoning Map make possible reasonable development of by right multifamily units at varying density allowances in the multifamily Medium High Density RM-1, Urban Density RM-2, High Density RM-3 districts; Mixed Use NMX, CMX, and RMX districts; Commercial CMS and CR districts; and Downtown DTN, DTG, and DTC zoning districts. The RM, Mixed Use, Commercial, and Downtown districts also permit a mix of other housing types including single family attached and duplexes. The Development Code and General Plan provide for a range of densities for multifamily in the RM districts (up to 45 units/acre, without density bonus, in the RM-3 district); mixed-use buildings or standalone residential in the Commercial districts (up to 16 units/acre); and mixed-use buildings in the Mixed Use districts (up to 45 units/acre, without density bonus, in the RMX district) and in the Downtown districts with no density limits. The development regulations for the RM districts include minimum densities for multifamily as well. Fresno received a “1/low risk” score on Issue 7 of the matrix related to permitted by right multifamily development.49 As for Issue 8 regarding alternative types of affordable housing, the City scored a “1/low risk” because it permits both manufactured housing and accessory dwelling units. State law mandates that accessory dwelling units be permitted by right wherever single-family dwellings are permitted, subject to local design and development conditions. ADUs have the potential to reduce barriers to housing options for some families as a form of infill-development that can be affordable and offer important housing choice within existing high-opportunity neighborhoods. Under Fresno’s Development Code, “Second Dwelling Units” (i.e. accessory dwelling units), “Backyard Cottages” (i.e. “tiny homes”), and “Accessory Living Quarters” (dependent units) are permitted by right in all the single-family and multifamily districts where they meet zoning and design requirements. The maximum floor areas are 1,250 sq. ft. for a second dwelling unit, 440 sq. ft. for a backyard cottage, and 500 sq. ft. for an accessory living quarter. In 2019, the California legislature passed a bill that limits fees and restrictions on building new accessory dwelling units. For example, ADUs created by converting a garage would not be required to have replacement parking.50 Another ADU bill eliminates minimum lot size requirements for adding an ADU, requires proposed ADUs to be ministerially approved or denied within 60 days, and allows ADUs to be added inside existing apartment buildings (typically via conversion of parking garages).51 In Fresno, a manufactured/factory-built house is considered a single-family detached dwelling unit and is treated as such. Manufactured homes in compliance with state and local regulations may be used for residential purposes if built on a permanent foundation. Mobile home parks are 49 While multifamily dwellings are a permitted use in the RM, Mixed Use, and Downtown districts, a determination of whether a sufficient portion of the zoning map permits multifamily development to meet demand was not made. Besides development controls and permit procedures, availability of land affects the feasibility of developing multifamily housing. The housing element of the General Plan describes the availability of vacant and underdeveloped land that may be designated for multifamily dwellings. Other considerations like housing market conditions, existing land-use patterns, the provision of public services and infrastructure, demand for “luxury” units, and other planning goals also have an impact on the quantity of multifamily and affordable housing. 50 SB 13, effective October 9, 2019, to amend, repeal, and add Section 65852.2 of the Government Code, and to add and repeal Section 17980.12 of the Health and Safety Code, relating to land use 51 AB 68, effective October 9, 2019, to amend Sec. 65852.2 and 65852.22 of the Government Code. 110 permitted in the RM-MH district, with a minimum density of 12 u/a and a maximum density of 16 u/a. Inclusionary Zoning and Density Bonuses Inclusionary zoning can be an important tool for affirmatively furthering fair housing choice. Voluntary and mandatory IZ can both help boost the number of affordable units and act as a desegregation tool to help support neighborhood diversity and keep high-opportunity areas affordable for a greater socioeconomic swath of the population. Because the private developer subsidizes the affordable units (in exchange for greater density and other development concessions), the main difficulty in implementing inclusionary zoning is finding how much below market rentals/sales developers will tolerate before making new housing construction economically infeasible and actually having a negative effect on housing unit production. As for Issue 10 regarding inclusionary zoning efforts, Fresno’s Development Code does include voluntary inclusionary zoning incentives for the development of affordable housing and housing for older persons, tracking the State’s mandate for local governments to implement the state density bonus law. The bonuses under the local ordinance apply to general residential projects of five or more units and senior housing projects of more than 35 units. Developments that meet the thresholds for density bonuses also may qualify for other incentives and concessions such as modification of development standards, reduced off-street parking requirements; or others proposed by the developer or the City that result in identifiable cost reductions. Under the current local ordinance, the developer may receive a density bonus of (a) 20% if 5% of the total units of a housing development are affordable to very low income households; (b) 20% if 10% of the total units of a housing development are affordable to lower income households; (c) 20% if a housing development qualifies as a Senior Citizen Housing Development; (d) 5% if 10% of the total dwelling units in a condominium project are affordable to persons and families of moderate income; (e) 25% for conversion of apartments to condos if at least 33% of the total units of the proposed condominium project are affordable to persons of low or moderate income or if 15% of the total units of the condominium project are affordable to lower income households; or (f) additional density bonus or concessions for a development that includes a state childcare facility or a donation of land that could accommodate at least 40 units. For rental units, the City and property owner must enter into an enforceable recorded covenant which governs such things as number of units; target units; household income group; certification procedures; building schedule; term of affordability; remedies for breach; etc. Fresno’s Development Code also includes a Transit Oriented Development-TOD Height and Density Bonus that may be used in combination with an Affordable Housing Density Bonus. For projects that qualify for both the TOD bonus and Affordable Housing bonus, the bonus height may exceed the base district height by 25% and the bonus density may exceed that of the base district by 100%. 111 California’s density bonus law has been amended many times since it was first adopted in 1976 to clarify the legislation in response to legal and implementation challenges and to add new provisions and standards. For instance, the term of affordability has gone up from 30 to 55 years for low and very low-income units under state law. Other changes to the state law that are not yet reflected in Fresno’s local ordinance include an update to the reduced parking requirements as a development incentive; density bonus option for commercial developments that include affordable dwelling units; other housing categories that are eligible for a density bonus like low-income student housing, transitional housing for foster youth, housing for veterans, and housing for persons experiencing homelessness; and rules clarifying the application and processing requirements, among others. The state regulations regarding density bonuses use a sliding scale so that the greater the percentage of affordable units, the higher the density bonus. The newest amendments, which took effect January 1, 2020, significantly increase the potential density bonus and concessions to which a developer may be entitled. For 100% affordable housing projects, the development can receive an 80% density bonus over the base density, four regulatory concessions, and are not subject to any minimum parking requirements. If the project is within one-half mile of a major transit stop, the city may not apply any density limit to the project and it will also receive a height increase of up to three additional stories, or 33 feet. Limits on 100% affordable projects will only come from other local development standards like maximum height limits, setbacks, lot coverage, etc. (which also may be subject to allowable concessions). Fresno’s ordinance was last updated effective 2016. However, as the state law is amended from time to time, the updated requirements are incorporated by reference into the local ordinance regarding inclusionary zoning bonuses. “The provisions of this section shall be governed by the requirements of Government Code Section 65915. Where conflict may occur between the provisions of this section and State law, the State law shall govern.” Fresno should update its density bonus ordinances to codify changes to the state law that have occurred since its last update, including the new bonus for 100% affordable projects. The City could go even further than the state bonus law in ensuring the long-term affordability of not just rental units but owner-occupied units as well. For-sale units are only required to be affordable to the initial occupants of the units, who must be very low income, lower income or moderate income, as applicable. At resale, the local government must enforce an equity-sharing agreement (involving sale of the home at fair market value and sharing of the profits with the city). To avoid losing affordable owner-occupied units with the first resale, Fresno could adopt requirements for deed restrictions or other measures to protect long-term affordability for an owner-occupied project to be eligible for a density bonus. Fresno could also consider adopting mandatory inclusionary zoning requiring that developers wanting to build in the city’s strongest housing markets or core neighborhoods provide some amount of affordable units, as mandatory vs. voluntary inclusionary programs have shown much more success in actually producing new affordable units.52 A 2006 survey of mandatory and 52 See Brian R. Lerman, Mandatory Inclusionary Zoning—The Answer to the Affordable 112 voluntary inclusionary programs in California found that of the 170 then-known programs in the state, 24 of these programs had been able to produce 10% or more of their new units as inclusionary housing. Of these 24 productive programs, 22 were mandatory vs. 2 that were voluntary (and which were actually found to have relied on growth management policies to produce the affordable housing).53 Although no one specific zoning change will solve affordable or fair housing needs alone, taken together these zoning tools could potentially allow for an increased supply of housing more equitably across the jurisdiction, both single-family and multi-unit, which helps put downward pressure on rental and sale prices, so that moderate and low-income families have access to all the congruent benefits that come with housing choice including access to better jobs, schools, public transportation, healthcare, cultural amenities, and public accommodations. Housing Problem, 33 B.C. ENVTL. AFF. L. REV. 383, 387–88 (2006); Pinedo, Victor J., Embracing the Excluded: Using Mandatory Inclusionary Zoning to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing in St. Louis, Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy: Vol. 26 : Iss. 2 , Article 5 (2016). 53 Nonprofit Housing Association of Northern California, Affordable by Choice: Trends in California Inclusionary Housing Programs, 2006, available at http://inclusionaryhousing.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/NPH- IHinCA2006.pdf. 113 CHAPTER 7. PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING Publicly supported housing encompasses several strategies and programs developed since the 1930s by the federal government to ameliorate housing hardships that exist in neighborhoods throughout the country. The introduction and mass implementation of slum clearance to construct public housing projects during the mid-1900s signified the beginning of publicly supported housing programs. Government-owned and managed public housing was an attempt to alleviate problems found in low-income neighborhoods such as overcrowding, substandard housing, and unsanitary conditions. Once thought of as a solution, the intense concentration of poverty in public housing projects often exacerbated negative conditions that would have lasting and profound impact on their communities. Improving on public housing’s model of high-density, fixed-site dwellings for very low-income households, publicly supported housing programs have since evolved into a more multi-faceted approach overseen by local housing agencies. The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 created Section 8 rental assistance programs. Section 8, also referred to as the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program, provides two types of housing vouchers to subsidize rent for low-income households: project-based and tenant-based. Project-based vouchers can be applied to fixed housing units in scattered site locations while tenant-based vouchers allow recipients the opportunity to find and help pay for available rental housing on the private market. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 created the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program to incentivize development of affordable, rental-housing development. Funds are distributed to state housing finance agencies that award tax credits to qualified projects to subsidize development costs. Other HUD Programs including Section 811 and Section 202 also provide funding to develop multifamily rental housing specifically for disabled and elderly populations. The now-defunct HOPE VI program was introduced in the early 1990s to revitalize and rebuild dilapidated public housing projects and create mixed-income communities. Although HOPE VI achieved some important successes, the Choice Neighborhoods Initiative program was developed to improve on the lessons learned from HOPE VI. The scope of Choice THERE ARE OVER 13,000 SUBSIDIZED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS IN FRESNO. MOST OF THESE ARE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS AND LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT UNITS. HOUSEHOLDS OF COLOR ARE OVERREPRESENTED IN PUBLIC HOUSING AND IN THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM RELATIVE TO THEIR OVERALL POPULATION SHARES IN THE CITY OF FRESNO. 114 Neighborhoods spans beyond housing and addresses employment access, education quality, public safety, health, and recreation.54 Current publicly supported housing programs signify a general shift in ideology toward more comprehensive community investment and de-concentration of poverty. However, studies have shown a tendency for subsidized low-income housing developments and residents utilizing housing vouchers to continue to cluster in disadvantaged, low-income neighborhoods. Programmatic rules and the point allocation systems for LIHTC are thought to play a role in this clustering and recent years have seen many states revising their allocation formulas to discourage this pattern in new developments.55 The reasons for clustering of HCVs is more complicated since factors in decision-making vary greatly by individual household. However, there are indications that proximity to social networks, difficulties searching for housing, and perceived or actual discrimination contribute to clustering.56 This section will review the current supply and occupancy characteristics of publicly supported housing types and its geographic distribution within the study area. Supply and Occupancy Fresno residents are served by the Fresno Housing Authority (Fresno Housing, or “FH”). FH combines into a single organization the Housing Authority of the City of Fresno and the Housing Authority of Fresno County, technically both separate entities with their own distinct boards of commissioners. Data from HUD’s Picture of Subsidized Housing indicates that there are 13,596 publicly supported housing units associated with the City’s Housing Authority (see Table 18). These units include public housing, project-based Section 8, housing choice vouchers and “other multi-family”, which includes units designated for seniors and/or disabled residents through the Section 202 and Section 811 programs. There are also approximately 6,547 LIHTC units in the city. Together, publicly supported housing in Fresno makes up over 11% of the city’s housing units. The FH’s 2020 Annual Plan provides the most recent record of the FH housing inventory; the plan states that there are 506 public housing units and 7,159 housing choice vouchers in use, equaling 7,665 publicly supported housing units. TABLE 18. UNITS BY PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITY Housing Authority Public Housing Units Housing Choice Vouchers Housing Authority of the City of Fresno 506 7,159 Housing Authority of the Fresno County 607 5,652 Source: 2020 Annual PHA Plans 54 Department of Housing and Urban Development. Evidence Matters: Transforming Knowledge Into Housing and Community Development Policy. 2011. www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/em/EM-newsletter_FNL_web.pdf. 55 Dawkins, Casey J. Exploring the Spatial Distribution of Low Income Housing Tax Credit Properties. US Department of Housing and Urban Development, www.huduser.gov/publications/pdf/dawkins_exploringliht_assistedhousingrcr04.pdf. 56 Galvez, Martha M. What Do We Know About Housing Choice Voucher Program Location Outcomes? A Review of Recent Literature. What Works Collaborative, 2010. www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/29176/412218- What-Do-We-Know-About-Housing-Choice-Voucher-Program-Location-Outcomes-.PDF. 115 TABLE 19. PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING UNITS BY PROGRAM CATEGORY Table 20 shows residents of publicly supported housing in the city by race and ethnicity. While Hispanic households make up 38.4% of the city’s households, they make up over half of the city’s public housing residents, 45% of HCV holders and 44% of residents in Project Based Section 8 housing. Black residents also make up a significant percentage of the public housing residents (28%) and HCV holders (35%), despite being only 8.7% of the city’s population. White households make up nearly 55% of all residents in other multi-family units such as senior housing and housing for the disabled, which is also the publicly supported housing type with the largest number of Asian households. These patterns continue in the Fresno region, where Hispanic households make up an even larger share of public housing residents (65%), Project Based Section 8 residents (52%) and HCV holders (48%). White households again make up the majority of “other multifamily” housing residents in the region, comprising 64% of residents in this housing type. Housing Units City of Fresno Fresno Region # % # % Total housing units 176,617 - 326,213 - Public housing 651 0.4% 1,180 0.4% Project-based Section 8 2,199 1.2% 3,083 0.9% Other multifamily 98 >0.1% 298 >0.1% HCV program 10,648 6.0% 12,705 3.9% LIHTC program 6,547 3.7% - - Source: 2013-2017 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table DP04; APSH; HUD User LIHTC Database Housing Type Race/Ethnicity White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander 116 TABLE 20. PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING RESIDENTS BY RACE/ETHNICITY # % # % # % # % City of Fresno Public Housing 59 8.9% 185 28.0% 367 55.6% 47 7.1% Project-Based Section 8 501 24.5% 399 19.5% 890 43.5% 150 7.3% Other Multifamily 51 54.8% 7 7.5% 22 23.7% 11 11.8% HCV Program 1,274 12.8% 3,458 34.6% 4,524 45.3% 668 6.7% 0-30% AMI 5,210 23.0% 3,720 16.4% 10,830 47.8% 2,410 47.8% 0-50% AMI 10,020 22.7% 6,005 13.6% 20,960 47.5% 4,539 47.5% 0-80% AMI 18,645 26.5% 8,100 11.5% 33,545 47.7% 6,897 47.7% Total Households 64,665 40.6% 13,775 8.7% 61,070 38.4% 15,637 38.4% Fresno Region Public Housing 77 7.9% 207 21.3% 632 64.9% 56 5.8% Project-Based Section 8 511 21.1% 402 16.6% 1,253 51.7% 152 6.3% Other Family 181 63.7% 15 5.3% 67 23.6% 17 6.0% HCV Program 1,704 13.8% 3,877 31.5% 5,861 47.6% 793 6.4% 0-30% AMI 9,410 26.4% 3,950 11.1% 18,650 52.3% 2,875 52.3% 0-50% AMI 17,000 23.6% 6,535 9.1% 38,350 53.1% 5,649 53.1% 0-80% AMI 32,385 27.1% 8,845 7.4% 63,480 53.1% 9,052 53.1% Total Households 126,010 43.5% 15,785 5.5% 118,935 41.0% 22,482 41.0% Note: Data presented are number of households, not individuals. Source: Decennial Census; CHAS; APSH 117 Geography of Supported Housing In the map that follows, the locations of publicly supported housing developments are represented along with levels of Housing Choice Voucher use, which is indicated by gray shading. Superimposed over the map are also dots representing racial/ethnic demographics. The blue markers on the maps indicate the locations of public housing. Figure 47 indicates several public housing developments including Fairview Heights Terrace and Yosemite Village, Phase II in Southwest Fresno, Yosemite Village and Parc Grove Commons II east of Hwy 41 in the Maclane neighborhood, and Pacific Gardens in Southeast Fresno. The orange markers on the maps indicate the location of Project Based Section 8 units. Figure 47 shows clustering of Project Based Section 8 units in Southwest Fresno, Central Fresno, West Fresno and some scattered locations along Kings Canyon Road in Southeast Fresno. The El Cazador Apartments just south of Shaw Avenue and the Millbrook Park Apartments located north of Herndon Avenue represent the few Project Based Section 8 locations toward northern Fresno. Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) developments are also indicated on the maps with purple markers. The LIHTC program is the primary source of subsidy for development of affordable housing by the private market. Created by the Federal Tax Reform Act of 1986, the LIHTC program makes available an indirect federal subsidy for investors in affordable rental housing. The value of the tax credits awarded to a project may be syndicated by the recipient to generate equity investment, offsetting a portion of the development cost. As a condition of the LIHTC subsidy received, the resulting housing must meet certain affordability conditions. FH is an active and successful LIHTC developer, having built more than 30 properties over the last 10 years. LIHTC developments can be found in almost every Fresno neighborhood, except for northeast Fresno. Clusters of LIHTC developments are found west of in Southwest Fresno south of E. California Avenue, in Southeast Fresno, south of East Kings Canyon Road, and in west Fresno along N. Marks Avenue and N. Brawley Avenue. There are LIHTC developments in the Hoover neighborhood located north of downtown, however, only one LIHTC site is located north of Herndon Avenue. There are no LIHTC sites in northwest Fresno. Other multifamily units are indicated on the maps below with green markers. There are two developments within this “other multifamily” category located within Fresno’s city limits. Arbor Court in Southeast Fresno provides 19 units which exclusively serve disabled households. The Sierra Gateway Senior Residence in West Fresno serves seniors. The rates at which Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs) are used are represented by the shading on the maps. HCVs are issued to households and may be used at a rental unit of the tenant’s choosing to reduce the tenant’s share of rent payments to an affordable level. Therefore, unlike the publicly supported developments marked on the map, HCVs are portable and their distribution throughout the city is subject to fluctuate based on location preferences of individual voucher households and the participation of landlords in the HCV program. Housing choice vouchers are in use across west, central and south Fresno. Central Fresno has clusters of HCV use east of Highway 41 and south of E. Ashlan Avenue. In Southeast Fresno, census tracts abutting Sequoia-Kings Canyon Freeway, and further south along E. Kings Canyon Road show clustering of HCV use. HCV use is also prevalent in West Fresno, south of N. Santa Fe Avenue. This area, separated by railroad tracks from northwest Fresno, indicates the stark difference between northwest and northeast Fresno and the rest of the city. Northeast Fresno has very 118 limited HCV use, with only four census tracts north of Herndon Avenue containing any HCVs, and of those four tracts, no tract exceeds 5% HCV use. Northwest Fresno also has limited HCV use; the single census tract north of N. Santa Fe Avenue with HCV use is composed of approximately 18% vouchers. A recent change to state law went into effect in January 2020 that protects HCV holders from discrimination by landlords based on their participation in the HCV program. With this new prohibition against landlords refusing HCV tenants, resources to educate northeast and northwest Fresno landlords who have traditionally not participated in the HCV program should be considered as ways to improve and balance the distribution of HCVs in the city. 119 FIGURE 47. PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING AND RACE / ETHNICITY IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 120 FIGURE 48. PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING AND RACE / ETHNICITY IN THE FRESNO REGION 121 Policy Review As required by HUD, the Housing Authority of the City of Fresno (also known as the Fresno Housing Authority or FH) maintains a comprehensive Five-Year Plan with annual plan updates, as well as other program-specific policies. The most pertinent of these policies for review in this analysis is the Admissions and Continued Occupancy Policy, or ACOP. These documents set policy for who may be housed by the housing authority and how those tenant households are selected. Three different aspects of the ACOP are examined here: tenant selection, local preference, and tenant screening. These three policy types all allow some degree of local determination by FH and are among the most central to matters of fair housing choice. FH’s tenant selection process begins with its interest list, which applicants must be added to in order to be interviewed for housing. Applicants to FH must complete a pre-application form, which places them on an interest list for the site of their choice. Households are placed on the interest list according to the number of bedrooms required for the family. Once an application has been selected from the interest list, all adult family members must attend a face-to-face interview. The interview process includes the completion and signing of the FH application, and signing the Personal Declaration packet – which includes declarations about citizenship and other required criteria. If after the interview the family is determined to be eligible for housing, the family will be notified of the time frame to expect placement in a unit. Families deemed eligible will be offered a housing unit based on their placement on a wait list. Once the FH offers a unit to an applicant, the applicant has 3 business days to accept the unit before being removed from the waiting list. Fresno Housing Authority’s Residency Preference Policy gives preference during the application process to families who meet certain residency criteria. Families who receive residency preference must have at least one member who lives or works in Fresno County, or who has received an offer of employment in Fresno County. A family with one member enrolled in an institution of higher learning in Fresno County is also eligible for residency preference. The FH also utilizes a US Veteran’s Preference criterion which gives offers additional preference in the application process to active members of the military, veterans and surviving spouses. The FH will also assign preference status, on a limited basis, to homeless persons/families, followed by families displaced as result of natural disaster, code enforcement initiative, public improvement or development, domestic violence, hate crime, or law enforcement cooperation. This limited preference status requires a referral and verification – typically from a government agency – of the family’s condition. Local preference is determined at the time of the full application process. Families on an FH interest list are ranked by the number of points they receive during the application process. Those families who have received the same number of points during the application process are then selected randomly to participate in the full application process. Residency preference weights the family’s FH application by 15 points. The veteran’s preference weights the application by another 10 points. Tenant screening is a critical part of the application process to ensure the well-being of housing authority residents, staff and property. First, tenant screening requires that the family applying for housing meet certain criteria regarding family composition, citizenship, income, suitability, debt to other housing authorities, and current or past criminal activities of household members. Applicants undergo criminal background checks such as FBI fingerprinting, DOJ Lifetime Sex 122 Offender registration, and other municipal and state criminal database searches. The criminal histories of all family members may be considered for eligibility. At the time of the applicant’s criminal background check, the FH also collects credit reports and eviction reports. The FH assesses applicants on their ability to fulfill important responsibilities as a tenant. Assessments include the ability to pay rent in a timely manner, demonstrate care for the unit, its appliances, and all facilities, and to cooperate with others’ rights to peaceful enjoyment of their homes. The FH also examines whether the applicants have a history of criminal activity or alcohol abuse that disrupts the peaceful enjoyment of a home, sex offenses, fraud, bribery, manufacture of methamphetamine, or other forms of deceit or non-compliance with law enforcement. All applicants must demonstrate the ability and willingness to follow the terms of their lease. If needed, the FH may complete a home visit at the applicant’s current residence to ensure their suitability with FH. Home visits are triggered when a landlord abstains from referring an applicant or addresses suitability concerns, when information on the application is inconsistent from credit or rental reports, when the applicant claims to have zero income, when a criminal background check raises concerns, or when an FH interviewer raises concerns about suitability due to the applicant’s statements or behavior during the interview. The FH also screens for drug-related activity, violent criminal activity or other threatening or criminal sexual conduct within the last 5 years. Applicants may be denied housing for a range of reasons, particularly reasons which are crime- related. A denial must occur if a family member has been convicted of manufacturing methamphetamine on housing authority grounds, has been convicted of a drug related crime within 3 years, or has patterns of illegal substance abuse within the past 3 years. Housing is also denied to those on lifetime sex offender registries, or those involved in violent criminal activity within the past 5-7 years. Housing may also be denied where the applicant displays patterns of difficulty paying rent, disturbing neighbors, or has previously been removed from federal housing. The FH may consider mitigating circumstances with applicants where applicants have achieved successful rehabilitation or modification of past behaviors or have received successful counseling or treatment for past behaviors. 123 CHAPTER 8. HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 19% of the American population reported having a disability in 2010. Research has found an inadequate supply of housing that meets the needs of people with disabilities and allows for independent living. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development identified that approximately one third of the nation’s housing stock can be modified to accommodate people with disabilities, but less than 1% is currently accessible by wheelchair users.57 Identifying and quantifying existing accessible housing for all disabilities is a difficult task because of varying needs associated with each disability type. People with hearing difficulty require modifications to auditory notifications like fire alarms and telecommunication systems while visually impaired individuals require tactile components in design and elimination of trip hazards. Housing for people that have difficulty with cognitive functions, self-care, and independent living often require assisted living facilities, services, and staff to be accessible. Modifications and assisted living arrangements tend to pose significant costs for the disabled population, which already experiences higher poverty rates compared to populations with no disability. Studies have found that 55% of renter households that have a member with a disability have housing cost burdens, compared with 45% of those with no disabilities.58 Residential Patterns In the City of Fresno, an estimated 61,006 persons 5-years-old and older have a disability. This figure represents 13.5% of the total population. People aged 18-64 have the highest disability rate at 7.8%. Disabled seniors 65 and over make up 4.4% of the total population, while children with disabilities make up 1.3% of the population. Rates of disability in the region are lower for children and adults aged 18-64. However, there is a slightly higher percentage of disabled seniors in the region, where this group represents 4.7% of the population. Ambulatory difficulties are the most common type of disability in Fresno, affecting 7.1% of the city’s population. Cognitive and independent living difficulties are the next most prevalent, affecting 5.8% and 5.4% of the population. Smaller percentages of the population are affected by hearing difficulties (3.7%), vision difficulties (3.2%), and self-care difficulties (3%). The 57 Chan, S., Bosher, L., Ellen, I., Karfunkel , B., & Liao, H. . L. (2015). Accessibility of America’s Housing Stock: Analysis of the 2011 American Housing Survey. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: Office of Policy Development and Research. 58 America's Rental Housing 2017. (2017). Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. APPROXIMATELY 13.5% OF FRESNO’S RESIDENTS HAVE A DISABILITY, COMPARED TO 12.7% OF THE REGION’S POPULATION. AMBULATORY DIFFICULTIES ARE THE MOST COMMON TYPE OF DISABILITY IN FRESNO, AFFECTING 7.1% OF THE CITY’S RESIDENTS. 124 population with disabilities is well dispersed throughout Fresno, although there is a slightly greater concentration of children with disabilities in the MacLane neighborhood west of the airport. Adults aged 18-64 and seniors with disabilities are dispersed evenly throughout the city. In the region, children, adults and seniors with disabilities tend to live in cities such Selma, Reedley, Parlier, Sanger, Kerman and Coalinga, and in parts of Fresno County near west Fresno and Firebaugh. TABLE 21. DISABILITY BY TYPE Disability Type City of Fresno Fresno Region # % # % Hearing difficulty 16,712 3.7% 31,270 3.7% Vision difficulty 14,563 3.2% 23,661 2.8% Cognitive difficulty 26,383 5.8% 42,299 5.0% Ambulatory difficulty 16,712 7.1% 31,270 6.7% Self-care difficulty 13,707 3.0% 23,733 2.8% Independent living difficulty 24,354 5.4% 41,042 4.8% Note: All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region. Source: ACS TABLE 22. DISABILITY BY AGE GROUP Age of People with Disabilities City of Fresno Fresno Region # % # % Age 5-17 with disabilities 5,871 1.3% 9,358 1.1% Age 18-64 with disabilities 35,294 7.8% 58,242 6.9% Age 65+ with disabilities 19,841 4.4% 39,557 4.7% Note: All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region. Source: ACS 125 FIGURE 49. PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY BY AGE IN THE CITY OF FRESNO 126 FIGURE 50. PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY BY AGE IN THE FRESNO REGION 127 Accessible Housing Supply and Affordability The HUD Resource Locator identifies seven Section 202 properties in Fresno with some accessibility features; the sites are primarily designed for seniors but may also permit younger adults with disabilities. Stakeholders also identified Arbor Court as a 19-unit development specifically designed for persons with physical disabilities. A point-in-time search for wheelchair- accessible apartments for rent using the Apartments.com site returned 220 units, however, only eight of those advertised rents under $1,000 per month. The site’s search feature identified only four wheelchair-accessible units restricted specifically for low-income households and search criteria for accommodations other than wheelchair accessibility were not available. Based on standard Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments in California of $943 per month (equating to an affordable monthly rent of $283 or less), it is highly likely that people with disabilities who are unable to work and rely on SSI as their sole source of income face substantial cost burdens and difficulty locating affordable housing. Publicly supported housing is often a key source of accessible and affordable housing for people with disabilities, and in the study area, these subsidized housing options are much more likely to contain households with at least one member with a disability than the housing stock in general. Table 23 shows the types of publicly supported housing that persons with disabilities are able to access. Data in Table 23 also provides insight into which programs are more likely to provide disabled individuals with housing. TABLE 23. DISABILITY BY PUBLICLY SUPPORTED HOUSING PROGRAM CATEGORY Housing Type People with a Disability City of Fresno Fresno Region # % # % Public Housing 87 13.0% 128 12.9% Project-Based Section 8 465 22.2% 480 19.3% Other Multifamily Housing 18 18.4% 19 6.4% HCV Program 1,650 16.2% 2,034 16.2% Note: The definition of “disability” used by the Census Bureau may not be comparable to reporting requirements under HUD programs. Source: ACS Supportive housing, a typically subsidized long-term housing option combined with a program of wrap-around services designed to support the needs of people with disabilities, is another important source of housing for this population. Unique housing requirements for people with an ambulatory difficulty may include accessibility improvements such as ramps, widened hallways and doorways, and installation of grab bars, along with access to community services such as transit. For low- and moderate-income households, the costs of these types of home modifications can be prohibitive, and renters may face particular hardships as they could be 128 required to pay the costs not just of the modifications, but also the costs of removing or reversing the modifications if they later choose to move. Zoning and Accessibility Fair housing laws do not preempt local zoning laws but do apply to municipalities and local government units and prohibit them from making zoning or land use decisions or implementing land use policies that exclude or otherwise discriminate against protected persons. This includes a local government’s affirmative obligation to provide reasonable accommodations to land use or zoning policies when such accommodations may be necessary to allow persons with disabilities to have an equal opportunity to use and enjoy housing. It also includes the affirmative obligation not to segregate housing for protected classes into lower-opportunity, less desirable areas of the jurisdiction. Even where a specific zoning decision does not violate a fair housing law, HUD entitlement communities accept an obligation to set and implement standards and policies that protect and advance fair housing choice for all. The Development Code’s potential effects on accessibility are assessed in this section. Several elements of the analysis that follows refer back to the scored zoning code review presented in Chapter 6. Definition of “Family” and Group Housing for People with Disabilities Often one of the most scrutinized provisions of a municipality’s zoning code is its definition of “family.” Local governments use this provision to limit the number of unrelated persons who may live together in a single dwelling as a means of preserving the stable, traditional, and residential character of their neighborhoods. Unreasonably restrictive definitions may have the unintended consequence (or intended consequence, depending on the motivations behind the drafting of the jurisdiction’s definition) of limiting housing for nontraditional families and for persons with disabilities who reside together in congregate living situations. Fresno’s municipal and development codes do not specifically define family, but rely instead on a definition of “household” and housing occupancy standards to regulate how many unrelated persons may reside together in a dwelling unit. Rather than an arbitrary number of persons, a household is described as one or a group of persons, whether related or unrelated, living together who share the dwelling’s common areas, living expenses, food costs, and utilities, and maintain a single mortgage, lease, or rental agreement. The definition of household is not facially discriminatory against any protected class. Accordingly, Fresno received a “1/low risk” score on Issue 1 because a definition of “family” or “household” is not used or applied in a manner that would treat differently or limit the housing choices of unrelated individuals with disabilities (or members of any other protected class) living together. Regarding housing for persons with disabilities, including those recovering from alcohol or drug abuse, the City received a “1/low risk” score on Issue 2 and on Issue 5 of the matrix. Because the City’s development code permits any number of unrelated persons to dwell together who fit the definition of a “household,” limited only by the housing/ building safety codes, housing for persons with disabilities who also meet the qualities of a “household” should be permitted in the 129 same manner regardless of the number of unrelated persons residing there.59 For other types of housing serving the needs of persons with disabilities, the development code has specific definitions and siting guidelines for “group residential" facilities, “residential care” facilities, and “transitional” and “supportive housing.” Fresno’s Development Code regarding these use types generally follows California’s directives under the state Health and Safety Code (which preempts local zoning rules) to protect housing for persons with disabilities from exclusionary zoning criteria. State law (HSC §§1500 et seq.) requires that licensed community care facilities serving six or fewer persons be: (1) treated as a residential use, (2) allowed by right in all residential zones, and (3) treated the same with respect to regulations, fees, taxes, and permit processes as other residential uses in the same zone, whether or not the facility actually functions as equivalent to the local jurisdiction’s definition of “family” or “single housekeeping unit.” Occupancy of these facilities or dwellings is limited only by building code requirements. This protection applies to community care facilities for persons with disabilities, to residential care facilities for the elderly (§§ 1569.84 et seq.), to alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities (§§ 11834.22 et seq.), and to congregate care facilities (§§ 1267.16. et seq.). Accordingly, under the Development Code, “residential care facilities-limited” (those serving 6 or fewer clients) are allowed by right in all zones that allow residential uses subject to the same development standards and permit processing standards as other residential uses in those zones. “Residential care facilities-general” (providing care for more than 6 persons) are permitted by right in the RM-2 and RM-3 districts and conditionally permitted in the residential single-family districts (RS-1 to RS-5), the RM-1 district, Downtown districts, and in the CMS district. Residential care facilities for seniors (including retirement communities and life care communities) are permitted by right in the RM-2, RM-3, MXD, and Downtown districts, and are a conditional use in the RM-1 and CMS districts. Transitional and supportive housing expressly constitute a residential use and are subject only to those restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same district. As with other types of housing for persons with disabilities, housing that serves the needs of persons recovering from alcohol or drug addiction should be permitted as other single-family residential types as long as the home also meets the criteria of a “household.” State law requires that residential substance abuse treatment facilities for six or fewer residents recovering from alcohol or drug addiction be treated as a “family” and permitted in single family residential zones. The development code makes space for facilities that serve these populations but do not otherwise meet the criteria for its definition of a “household.” The Development Code’s definition of residential care facility expressly includes housing for people in recovery from alcohol or drug addictions. The development code also includes “clean and sober” living facilities under the use category “group residential.” A group residential facility that houses 6 or fewer is classified as a small group residence; a group residential facility for 7 or more residents is classified as a large group residence, and the Development Code’s Permitted Use Table 59 See City of Santa Barbara v. Adamson, 27 Cal.3d 123 (1980) (holding that a group that bears “the generic character of a family unit as a relatively permanent household” is as “entitled to occupy a single family dwelling as its biologically related neighbors”). 130 regulates which residential zones the two types may be sited. Small group residential facilities are permitted by right in all single-family districts, multifamily districts, the Downtown districts, Mixed Use district, and CMS and CR commercial districts. Large group residential facilities are not permitted in the single-family districts but are a conditional use in the multifamily (MR), Downtown, Mixed Use, and CMS / CR districts. Also, residential reentry facilities are a conditional use in the RM districts, CG commercial district, and the Downtown districts. Domestic violence shelters for 6 or fewer residents are permitted in all single-family districts, multifamily districts, and mixed-use districts (excluding the manufactured housing RM-MH district). Shelters for 7 or more domestic violence victims also are permitted in the residential multifamily and mixed-use districts. The development code also makes space for emergency shelters serving persons experiencing homelessness in the RMX mixed use district and the CG commercial district, but no other residential districts. The Department of Justice has taken the position in a recent case against the City of San Jacinto, California that it is unlawful for a municipality to impose numerical occupancy limits on group housing for unrelated persons with disabilities that is more restrictive than numerical occupancy limits for related families or other unrelated persons.60 Because Fresno does not impose a cap on the number of nondisabled, unrelated persons who may occupy a single family residence and be presumed to be living as a single household (other than limits imposed by the housing/building safety codes), the municipality cannot impose a cap or arbitrary limit as an additional zoning requirement on housing for persons with disabilities because of their disability. The state’s rule that licensed group homes and residential treatment facilities of up to 6 residents must be permitted in single family zoning districts does not mean that facilities with more than 6 residents must necessarily be excluded or subject to restrictions not imposed on housing for an equal or greater number of unrelated persons without disabilities. Just as Fresno has chosen the housing/building code as the proper model for regulating occupancy limits rather than an arbitrary number under a “family” or “household” definition, the housing/building code is the proper vehicle for regulating the number of residents in a group home or supportive housing, not the zoning ordinance. The City should be careful in its application of the terms “group residential” facilities, “residential care” facilities, “transitional” and “supportive housing” etc., because persons with disabilities have the same Fair Housing Act protections whether or not their housing is considered to meet a jurisdictions’ use category definitions. As for Issue #4 of the matrix, the Development Code does not regulate concentrations of housing for persons with disabilities or put a quota on the number that may be sited within a certain distance from similar uses. Applications for residential care facilities may be subject to the administrative zone clearance or development permit process, as are other types of residential uses, and will be regulated by the zoning district in which it is located. The City received a “1/low risk” score on this issue. Reasonable Accommodations Adopting a reasonable accommodation ordinance is one specific way to address land use regulations’ impact on housing for persons with disabilities. Federal and state fair housing laws 60 United States v. City of San Jacinto, Civil Action No. 5:12-cv-01966 (C.D. Cal., consent decree June 16, 2014). 131 require that municipalities provide individuals with disabilities or developers of housing for people with disabilities flexibility in the application of land use and zoning and building regulations, practices, and procedures or even waive certain requirements, when it is reasonable and necessary to eliminate barriers to housing opportunities, or “to afford persons with a disability the equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.” Examples of a reasonable accommodation request may be simple such as a modification of the setback or lot coverage requirements to allow an external mobility ramp; modifying existing indoor space for accessible design features; parking changes; allowing more unrelated residents in a group home than the definition of “family” would typically permit; or more complicated like allowing a care home in a particular neighborhood or within a restricted distance to another facility without subjecting the applicant to the costly, time-consuming, and unpredictable special use permit or variance process. The FHAA does not set forth a specific process that must be used to request, review, and decide a reasonable accommodation, and accordingly many local jurisdictions across the country apply their respective zoning code’s variance or special use permit procedure to evaluate and process requests for reasonable accommodation. Variance and special permit procedures are imperfect models for processing reasonable accommodation requests because: (1) they generally require a showing of special circumstances or conditions applying to the land rather than to the individual’s special circumstances or condition due to a disability that affects his or her ability to use and enjoy the dwelling and (2) they subject the applicant to the public hearing process where there is the potential that community opposition based on stereotypical assumptions about people with disabilities and unfounded speculations about the impact on neighborhoods or threats to safety may impact the outcome. California recognized these issues as barriers to housing for persons with disabilities and in 2011, the State Attorney General recommended that cities and counties implement standardized fair housing reasonable accommodation procedures to comply with their affirmative duty to fair housing and to meet the requirements of the Housing Element of the General Plan, which mandates that local governments “remove constraints to, and provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for, intended for occupancy by, or with supportive services for, persons with disabilities.” Fresno adopted a Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance, effective 2016, which may allow an applicant with a disability a modification or exception to the rules, standards and practices for the siting, development, and use of housing or housing-related facilities for equal opportunity to the use and enjoyment of the housing of their choice. The applicant may use a form available from the City or make an oral request to the Director of Planning. Importantly, public notice is not required for consideration of a reasonable accommodation request and private or personal information regarding the nature of an individual's disability will be kept confidential except as needed to make or review the decision. Land use and zoning procedures are typically based on public disclosure and input; however, in the case of a reasonable accommodation request, the evaluation and decision-making process should include safeguards to protect confidential information regarding a person’s disabilities. 132 CHAPTER 9. FAIR HOUSING ACTIVITIES Fair Housing Resources California’s fair housing protections contained within the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) meet or exceed federal standards contained within Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, (the “Fair Housing Act” or “FHA” or “FHAA”). Accordingly, HUD has certified the FEHA as “substantially equivalent” to the substantive rights, procedures, remedies, and judicial review processes of the FHA, which makes California eligible for annual funding through the Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) for fair housing enforcement activities and programs. The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, created by the state legislature and certified by HUD as a participating agency, partners with HUD to enforce federal and state fair housing laws. Under its Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP), HUD also awards grant money to local fair housing advocacy organizations who assist persons believed to have been harmed by discriminatory housing practices; to help people identify government agencies that handle complaints of housing discrimination; to conduct preliminary investigation of claims; to carry out testing and enforcement activities to prevent or eliminate discriminatory housing practices; and to educate the public and housing providers about equal opportunity in housing and compliance with the fair housing laws. For FY 2018, HUD awarded the Fair Housing Council of Central California, which has a multi- county service area including Fresno, a multiyear Private Enforcement Initiatives (PEI) grant of $300,000 to use towards testing and enforcement activities to prevent or eliminate discriminatory housing practices in the California Central Valley region. The Fair Housing council will use its grant to continue the enforcement work of its previous multi-year grant including to increase the number of enforcement actions and referrals made by complainants; discover and remedy discrimination in public and private real estate markets; detect and remedy subtle and sophisticated forms of housing discrimination; reduce the incidence of steering and other practices perpetuating segregation; and increase the number of complaints filed by new immigrants, undocumented persons, and persons with disabilities. The Fair Housing Council also receives an annual grant of funds from the City of Fresno, receiving $40,000 in the 2019 program year to support fair housing outreach and education to ensure fair housing opportunities. Fair Housing Complaints An individual in Fresno who believes he or she has been the victim of an illegal housing practice under the FHA or FEHA may seek assistance from the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) or file a complaint with the appropriate HUD Regional Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) within one year of when the discriminatory 133 practice occurred. Typically, once certified, HUD will refer complaints of housing discrimination that it receives to the state or local FHAP agency for investigation, conciliation and enforcement activities. HUD policy favors having fair housing professionals based locally where the alleged discrimination occurred because it has found that a state or local agency’s closer proximity to the site of the alleged discrimination provides greater familiarity with local housing stock and trends and may lead to greater efficiency in case processing. Because the DFEH is a certified FHAP agency, most complaints filed with the HUD FHEO office will be referred back to the DFEH for investigation and enforcement. The California FEHA provides an alternative procedure to the administrative complaint process. Persons who believe they have experienced housing discrimination may file a pre-complaint inquiry with the DFEH. The Department accepts cases based on possible violations of the FEHA, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, the Ralph Civil Rights Act, the Disabled Persons Act, and the federal FHA under a work-sharing agreement with HUD. If the investigator determines that the complaint meets the criteria for federal dual-filing status, the complaint will be assigned a federal identification number as well. Complaints originally filed with DFEH that are dual-filed with HUD are investigated by DFEH. During the investigation phase, DFEH has the authority to issue subpoenas and take depositions. If the investigation does not show a violation of the law, DFEH will close the case. Before DFEH issues a finding, it may facilitate voluntary dispute resolution through conciliation or mediation. After DFEH issues a merit finding, the opposing parties are required to participate in mandatory dispute resolution. A no-fault resolution can be negotiated at any time during the process. If dispute resolution fails, the DFEH may elect to file a complaint to be heard before the Fair Employment and Housing Commission (FEHC) or in civil court on behalf of the aggrieved complainant. If HUD’s FHEO receives and retains a complaint, it will notify the alleged discriminator (respondent) and begin an investigation. During the investigation period, the agency will attempt through mediation to reach conciliation between the parties. If no conciliation agreement can be reached, the FHEO must prepare a final “Determination” report finding either that there is “reasonable cause” to believe that a discriminatory act has occurred or that there is no reasonable cause. If the agency finds “reasonable cause,” HUD must issue a “Charge of Discrimination.” If the investigator determines that there is no “reasonable cause,” the case is dismissed. If a charge is issued, a hearing/trial will be scheduled before an administrative law judge. The ALJ may award the aggrieved party injunctive relief, actual damages, and impose civil penalties; but unlike federal district court, the ALJ may not impose punitive damages. Administrative proceedings are generally more expedited than the federal court trial process. The advantages of seeking redress through the administrative complaint process are that the DFEH/FHEO takes on the duty, time, and cost of investigating the matter for the complainant and conciliation may result in a binding settlement. However, the complainant also gives up control of the investigation and ultimate findings. Unlike an employment discrimination case, it is not necessary for an aggrieved party to exhaust all administrative remedies before filing a housing discrimination lawsuit in court. Persons wishing to file a lawsuit directly in court may bypass the administrative process with the Department as they do not need a “right-to-sue” letter from the DFEH. Aggrieved persons retain 134 the right to bring their own civil action within the statute of limitations (generally two years) under either the federal FHA or the FEHA. The respondent in an administrative action also may elect to have the administrative proceeding terminated and the case instead adjudicated in federal court. The Department of Justice will prosecute the case on behalf of the aggrieved party. Additionally, the DOJ may bring suit on behalf of individuals based on referrals from HUD in the case of a “pattern or practice” of discriminatory actions, a case of particular importance to the public interest, or when there has been a breach of a conciliation agreement. An aggrieved party may intervene in any action filed by the DOJ. Though the FHA and FEHA are not identical, they are congruent, and accordingly California courts have historically been guided by both state and federal law in deciding claims of housing discrimination. “FEHA in the housing area is thus intended to conform to the general requirements of federal law in the area and may provide greater protection against discrimination.” Brown v. Smith, 55 Cal. App. 4th 767, 780 (1997). If an individual has evidence that his/her rights under the FHA or California FEHA have been violated in a final land use or zoning decision, the aggrieved person may file a complaint with the state DFEH or with HUD, or file a lawsuit directly in state or federal court within the statute of limitations period. HUD refers matters involving the legality of state or local zoning or other land use law or ordinance to the Department of Justice for further enforcement. Housing discrimination claims may be brought against local governments and zoning authorities and against private housing providers to protect the housing rights and interests of aggrieved individuals and families impacted by discrimination, local civil rights advocacy groups on behalf of protected classes, and the Department of Fair Employment and Housing or DOJ to protect the public interest. Complaints Filed with HUD Region IX of the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) receives complaints by households regarding alleged violations of the Fair Housing Act for cities and counties throughout California (as well as Arizona, American Samoa, Guam, Hawaii, and Nevada). The mission of the FHEO is to eliminate housing discrimination, promote economic opportunity, and achieve diverse, inclusive communities. To achieve this mission, the FHEO receives and investigates complaints of housing discrimination, and leads in the administration, development, and public education of federal fair housing laws and policies. The San Francisco Regional Office of the FHEO maintains data reflecting the number of complaints of housing discrimination received by HUD, the status of all such complaints, and the basis/bases of all such complaints. The office responded to a request for data regarding complaints received affecting housing units in the City of Fresno for the period January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2019. The complete data table provided by HUD is included as an appendix to this report with the HUD case file number, violation city, filing date, closure date, basis of complaint, issues cited, closure reason, and monetary relief provided. During this time, HUD received a total of 76 135 formal complaints of alleged housing discrimination occurring within Fresno. As of the date of reporting, seven of the 76 cases remained open and the other 69 had been closed. The number of complaints filed does not necessarily reflect the true number of acts of unlawful discrimination that may have occurred during the recent 5-year period as, on the one hand, some incidents go unreported and, on the other hand, cases may result in a “no cause” determination if HUD’s investigation reveals a lack of evidence of unlawful conduct. In 46% of the closed cases reported (32 of 69 cases), HUD made a “no cause” determination. TABLE 24. HUD COMPLAINTS BY CLOSURE REASON Twenty of the cases have been successfully settled through HUD’s conciliation and settlement process. In the cases resolved by settlement / conciliation, the respondents did not necessarily admit liability, but may have settled to avoid further expense, time, and the uncertainty of litigation. No monetary or equitable damages that may have been awarded to the complainant in those cases were reported by HUD. Fresno – Complaints by Closure Reason Closure Reason 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Complainant failed to cooperate 0 1 1 2 0 4 Complaint withdrawn by Complainant after resolution 1 3 1 4 0 9 Complaint withdrawn by Complainant without resolution 1 0 1 0 2 4 Conciliation / settlement successful 6 0 3 5 6 20 “No Cause” determination by HUD 5 9 10 3 5 32 Total Complaints Filed 13 13 16 14 20 76 Source: FOIA Request to HUD Region IX Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity 136 TABLE 25. HUD COMPLAINTS BY BASIS More than one basis of discrimination may be cited in a single complaint. Disability was the most often cited basis of discrimination, occurring in approximately 55% of filed cases. Race was the second most often cited basis of discrimination, cited as a factor in nearly 33% of filed cases. Of the 76 cases received and processed by HUD for housing in Fresno, disability was cited as the basis of discrimination in 42 cases, followed by race in 25 cases; retaliation in 11 cases; familial status in 9 cases; color in 6 cases; national origin in 5 cases; and sex in 5 cases. Complainants also may cite more than one discriminatory act or practice, recorded as the discriminatory issue. Discriminatory terms, conditions, privileges, or services and facilities was cited in 42 cases; failure to make reasonable accommodation was cited in 34 cases; discriminatory refusal to rent was cited in 31 cases; discriminatory acts under Section 818 (coercion, etc.) was cited in 15 cases; discriminatory advertising, statements and notices was cited in 13 cases; discrimination in terms/conditions/privileges relating to rental was cited in 7 cases; discriminatory refusal to rent and negotiate for rental was cited in 5 cases; other discriminatory acts was cited in 4 cases; discriminatory financing (includes real estate transactions), otherwise deny or make housing unavailable, and discriminatory refusal to negotiate for rental were cited in 2 cases each; and discrimination in terms/conditions/privileges relating to sale and discriminatory refusal to sell and negotiate for sale were cited in 1 case each. Fresno – Complaints by Basis Basis 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Color 1 1 3 0 1 6 Disability 3 7 7 10 15 42 Familial Status 5 2 2 0 0 9 National Origin 0 1 1 0 3 5 Race 6 5 8 3 3 25 Religion 0 0 0 0 0 0 Retaliation 2 2 2 1 4 11 Sex 3 1 0 0 1 5 Total Bases Alleged* 20 19 23 14 27 103 Total Complaints Filed 13 13 16 14 20 76 Source: FOIA Request to HUD Region IV Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity * More than one basis of discrimination may be cited in a single complaint 137 Complaints Filed with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing The Department of Fair Employment and Housing’s statutory mandate is to protect the people of California from employment, housing, and public accommodations discrimination, and hate violence and human trafficking. To accomplish this mission, the Department receives, investigates, conciliates, mediates, and prosecutes complaints of alleged violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Unruh Civil Rights Act, Disabled Persons Act, Ralph Civil Rights Act, Trafficking Victims Protection Act, and statutes prohibiting discrimination in state- funded activities and programs. The state’s fair housing law includes additional classes of persons protected from housing discrimination that are not necessarily protected by the federal FHA: gender identity and gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, age, source of income, genetic information, retaliation for protesting illegal discrimination, or “any other basis prohibited by Section 51 of the Civil Code,” which also includes as a basis of protection medical condition, citizenship, primary language, and immigration status. A complainant alleging he or she has experienced housing discrimination based on one of these additional protected classes, would not find relief by filing a complaint with HUD but instead would need to file the complaint with the state’s DFEH under state law protections. A request was submitted to the DFEH for data reflecting the number of housing discrimination related complaints received by the Department regarding housing units in Fresno for the previous five-year period (approximately November 1, 2014, through November 31, 2019). The DFEH reported that it had received and processed 21 formal complaints of housing discrimination originating within the jurisdiction of the City of Fresno. Of those, the DFEH dismissed 15 cases (71%) after a “no cause” finding; two cases were withdrawn by the complainant without resolution; two cases were conciliated/settled successfully; one case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; and one was settled by the Dispute Resolution Division (DRD) after voluntary mediation. The complete data table provided by the DFEH is included as an appendix to this report with the respondents’ business name and address, filing date, closure date, basis of complaint, and alleged harms experienced. 138 TABLE 26. DFEH COMPLAINTS BY BASIS: 2014-2019 Fresno – Complaints by Basis Basis Total Ancestry 2 Color 4 Disability 6 Engagement in Protected Activity 1 Familial Status 3 Marital Status 1 National Origin 1 Other 2 Race 6 Sex/Gender 1 Sexual Orientation 1 Source of Income 3 Total Bases Alleged* 31 Total Complaints Filed 21 Source: DFEH * More than one basis of discrimination may be cited in a single complaint Disability and race again were the most often cited basis of discrimination, followed by color, familial status, and source of income. The state’s data response also included the alleged “harms” (equivalent to the discriminatory “issues” under HUD’s data system) experienced by the complainants: denied reasonable accommodation was cited in six cases; “other” was cited in six cases; “evicted” was cited in five cases; “harassed” was cited in four cases; Denied rental/lease/sale was cited in three cases; subjected to discriminatory statements/advertisements was cited in four cases; subjected to 139 restrictive rule/ covenant was cited in four cases; denied equal terms and conditions was cited in two cases; and subjected to discriminatory zoning/land use was cited in 1 case. Complaints Filed with the Fair Housing Council of Central California The Fair Housing Council of Central California, located in Fresno, uses FHIP and other funding it receives, including an annual allocation from the City of Fresno’s CDBG funds, to investigate complaints of housing discrimination and predatory lending; promote integrated neighborhoods and equal housing opportunities; and offer mediation, counseling, advocacy, research, and fair housing training services for housing seekers and housing providers. FHCCC maintains a Discrimination Log with data regarding zip code, ethnicity, and gender from calls it receives from residents reporting possible discrimination claims. For the period July 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018, FHCCC logged 243 calls; for the period January 1, 2019, through June 1, 2019, FHCCC logged 265 calls. Of those calls, 140 complaints for the period July 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018, and 103 complaints for the period January 1, 2019 through June 30, 2019, were processed for further investigation and / or enforcement efforts. TABLE 27. FHCCC COMPLAINTS BY BASIS JULY-DECEMBER 2018 Fresno – Complaints by Basis July 2018 – Dec. 2018 Basis Number Issue Number Color 38 Rental 89 Disability 25 Sales Familial Status 5 Advertising National Origin 23 Lending/Red Lining Race 39 Insurance Religion Zoning Retaliation Accessibility 25 Sex / Gender 3 Terms and Conditions 89 Other* 7 Harassment 6 Source: Fair Housing Council of Central California * Other State violations include marital status, source of income, sexual orientation, age, arbitrary class discrimination. 140 TABLE 28. FHCCC COMPLAINTS BY BASIS JANUARY-JUNE 2019 Complainants may describe more than one basis of discrimination or issue in their complaint alleging an unlawful treatment in housing. For data collected for the second half of 2018, race, color, disability, and national origin were the most-often cited bases of discrimination. FHCCC opened 89 cases of alleged discrimination in rental housing, with 89 complaints also citing discriminatory terms and conditions, and 25 cases involving accessibility for persons with disabilities as the discriminatory issue. For data collected for the first half of 2019, race, color, disability, and national origin again were the most-often cited bases of discrimination. For January 2019 through June 2019, 102 cases involved rental housing and 1 case involved for- sale housing. Discriminatory terms and conditions was an issue cited in 88 of those cases, and accessibility for persons with disabilities was cited in 38 cases followed by harassment in 12 cases. FHCCC, reported that for the second quarter of 2018, it referred 5 cases to HUD for further action and 4 cases to private attorneys for assistance with pursuing claims; for the fourther quarter of 2018, it referred 3 cases to private attorneys; for the first half of 2019, it referred 4 cases to HUD for further action and 3 cases to private attorneys. Fresno – Complaints by Basis Jan. 2019 – June 2019 Basis Number Issue Number Color 21 Rental 102 Disability 38 Sales 1 Familial Status 7 Advertising National Origin 8 Lending/Red Lining Race 21 Insurance Religion Zoning Retaliation Accessibility 38 Sex / Gender 1 Terms and Conditions 88 Other* 7 Harassment 12 Source: Fair Housing Council of Central California * Other State violations include marital status, source of income, sexual orientation, age, arbitrary class discrimination. 141 In 2019, FHCCC conducted paired testing on the basis of race in the Fresno real estate market with the target area being all availble new home developments. Twenty-four paired tests, in new home listings and existing homes for sale, were conducted throughout existing neighborhoods in the City of Fresno.The overall paired systemic testing indicated discriminatory treatment of protected testers (African-Americans) in 37% of cases. Testers experienced discrimination 33% of the time in new home developments and in 40% of cases in existing homes in established neighborhoods. The executive director of FHCCC reports that these are alarming results that require more fair housing training and accountability for developers and real estate agents in the Fresno market. Fair Housing Lawsuits and Litigation For the five-year period January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2019, several noteworthy lawsuits have been litigated regarding alleged housing discrimination practices affecting fair and affordable housing in Fresno or the region: a HUD negotiated settlement targeting unfair lending practices by California mortgage lenders; a federal fair housing lawsuit against providers of emergency shelter housing for women; and two state court lawsuits against local jurisdictions seeking to compel compliance with their obligations under their respective General Plans and Housing Elements to provide affordable housing and services to disadvantaged groups. • [Redacted] v. Benchmark Communities, LLC, FHEO Case No. 09-16-5484-8 (Title VIII) (HUD Conciliation Agreement entered March 7, 2017). HUD facilitated a settlement agreement resolving accusations of unfair lending practices between a complainant and three California mortgage lenders, American Financial Network of Brea in Orange County, Benchmark Communities of Fresno, Brigantino Enterprise of Hollister, and also a Benchmark employee. The complainant filed a housing discrimination complaint with the FHEO in 2016 alleging he was unfairly denied an opportunity to pre-qualify for a mortgage loan based on his perceived Hispanic national origin, which precluded him from purchasing a home in Hollister. Equal access to credit for qualified individuals, regardless of their national origin or other protected status, is an important element of fair housing. Benchmark agreed to provide annual fair housing training to employees who interact with prospective homebuyers. American Financial agreed to train current and new employees and pay the complainant $5,000 in damages. • McGee v. Poverello House, Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-00768 (E.D. Cal. 2018). Four individual plaintiffs filed suit against Poverello House and Naomi’s House—two nonprofit organizations that provide meals, social services, and temporary shelter in downtown Fresno to persons experiencing homelessness—raising claims under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA), and negligent infliction of emotional distress and right to privacy violations. (A separate claim under the California Unruh Civil Rights Act was dismissed by the Court). The complaint detailed allegations of sexual harassment by a transgender individual (identified in pleadings as D.N.) who was described as dressing and identifying as a woman but remaining anatomically male. The plaintiffs further alleged that staff 142 failed to take action to protect their privacy and safety, and even threatened them with expulsion if they refused to shower with D.N. The defendant shelters receive federal grant funding through HUD, which requires them pursuant to the Equal Access Rule to provide services to transgender clients based on their gender identity. This case is scheduled to be heard in 2020, but a severe shortage of federal district judges and staff in the Eastern District could delay resolution of this case for years unless the parties reach a settlement. • Martinez v. City of Clovis, Case Number 19CECG03855 (Fresno Cnty Sup. Ct., file date Oct. 23, 2019). Petitioners, two women who each rely on supplemental income and Housing Choice Vouchers, filed suit against the City of Clovis alleging that the city is intentionally not complying with California’s housing law and is discriminating against low-income people by not accommodating high density housing developments in violation of state and federal fair housing laws. Petitioners seek a writ of mandate from the Fresno Superior Court to compel the City to comply with the state’s Housing Element Law—which requires cities and counties to develop plans every eight years designating land for development of housing that accommodates all income groups, including the jurisdiction’s share of its regional housing assessment targets—by rezoning adequate parcels of land within the jurisdiction to accommodate the unmet housing needs of low-income residents desiring to find adequate, affordable housing in the City. Petitioners also seek declaratory relief and an injunction against the City and its officials to cease their discriminatory housing practices. The City has so far disputed the Petitioners’ assertions and has claimed it is in full compliance with affordable housing regulations. It conceded that the state’s Housing and Community Development (HCD) department decertified the City’s Housing Element of its General Plan in 2018 because of a shortfall of parcels zoned to accommodate lower income housing, but claims that it has taken sufficient action (e.g., rezoning to permit multifamily housing in the public facility district and creating a new Regional Housing Needs Assessment overlay zone) to bring the city back into compliance with the state’s housing law. Indeed, in March 2019, HCD re-certified the City’s Housing Element A case management conference has been scheduled for later in February 2020, and a hearing for arguments on the City’s demurrer (objections) on April 14, 2020. • Comunidades Unidas por un Cambio v. County of Fresno, Case Number 18CECG04586 (Fresno Cnty Sup. Ct., file date Dec. 28, 2018). Comunidades Unidas por un Cambio (Communities United for Change) with the assistance of nonprofit Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability, filed an action against Fresno County and its Board of Supervisors seeking to enforce the County’s obligations under its General Plan and Housing Element to facilitate the development and maintenance of affordable housing and to address the needs of disadvantaged unincorporated communities (specifically for clean water 143 and functioning sewer services, stormwater drainage, and other infrastructure). The lawsuit outlines multiple deadlines the County has missed for accommodating affordable housing and improving infrastructure and other needs in historically disadvantaged communities. Plaintiffs allege that the County’s failure to comply disproportionately impacts Latinos and other minority groups and deprives them of the opportunity to live in decent, quality affordable housing and healthy and complete neighborhoods. The County asserted that it is currently in the midst of a revision and update to the general plan that will include elements that address some of the purported concerns of the Plaintiffs. The County also contends that Plaintiffs’ suit is premature because the County should be given more time to complete the action items and programs identified in its General Plan, and also argues that the deadlines and HCD guidelines that Plaintiffs claim the County has failed to meet are nonbinding. A hearing is scheduled for February 7, 2020, to hear arguments from the opposing sides regarding Plaintiff’s Writ of Mandate. Past Fair Housing Goals and Related Activities Fresno’s 2016 Analysis of Impediments identified public and private sector impediments to fair housing. The AI offered several recommendations for addressing the impediments, which are listed below: Administrative Impediments • Need to promote active public participation and involvement on issues impacting city residents. • Lack of use of the state fair housing system. Recommendations provided in the 2016 Analysis of Impediments • Establish an initiative, in partnership with local organizations and advocacy groups, to identify ways to promote public participation in housing and community development planning. Such organizations may include Stone Soup, the Center for New Americans, and the school districts, among others. • Create a “meeting in a box” that will allow agencies to hold meetings at different times and locations and provide feedback to City. • Through continuing contract with the Fair Housing Council of Central California (FHCCC) and collaboration with the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing, disseminate fair housing information through city events, workshops, and local media. • Include a web page on the city website detailing the rights and responsibilities of city residents under federal and state fair housing law, and hyperlinks to a variety of fair housing resources, including complaint forms for HUD and the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing. • Include data-sharing provisions in future contracts with the Fair Housing Council to receive fair housing complaints and testing data. 144 • Open a dialogue with the Fair Housing Council: the purposes of this dialogue would be to share the results of the current AI study and to identify ways in which the city can collaborate with the Council on addressing the impediments included in the study. • Through continuing contract with the Fair Housing Council of Central California, provide fair housing services that include advertising fair housing laws and complaint procedures in multiple languages through literature displays at City and County offices and through local non-profit groups. Spatial Impediments • Persistence of concentrated areas of poverty with disproportionate shares of racial/ethnic minorities. • Concentration of assisted housing in concentrated areas of poverty with relatively high concentrations of racial/ethnic minority residents. Recommendations provided in the 2016 Analysis of Impediments • Identify methods by which CDBG funding may be used to promote investment and leverage lending in areas of the city with high poverty and high concentrations of racial/ethnic minority residents in 2000 and 2010-2014. • Expand or reallocate CDBG funding for infrastructural improvements, public works projects, and housing rehabilitation/preservation, focusing on areas of poverty and high concentrations of minority residents. • Create enhanced infrastructure financing districts (EIDF) in distressed areas around the city center, with the goal of securing additional redevelopment funding for those areas. • Advocate and facilitate the conservation and rehabilitation of substandard residential properties by homeowners and landlords. • Continue to facilitate access to rehabilitation programs that provide financial and technical assistance to low- and moderate-income households for the repair and rehabilitation of existing housing with substandard conditions. • Work with the Fresno Housing Authority to raise housing payment standards for Housing Choice Vouchers to expand housing choice for low-income residents in areas with higher housing costs and lower concentrations of subsidized units. • Open a dialogue with affordable housing developers to identify barriers to entry for construction outside of areas in which affordable units are currently concentrated. • Encourage the Fresno Housing Authority to provide mobility counseling to voucher recipients. • Actively pursue funding to assist in the development, preservation, and rehabilitation of any existing housing type with a particular emphasis on the development of mixed- income neighborhoods. • Ensure that all development applications are considered, reviewed, and approved without prejudice to the proposed residents. Financial/Affordability Impediments • Black and Hispanic home purchase loan applicants have been denied home purchase loans at a higher rate than white or non-Hispanic residents. 145 • Relatively low levels of private investment in racial/ethnic minority neighborhoods and areas with comparatively high poverty rates. • Discrimination in the home sales market on the basis of race and ethnicity. Recommendations provided in the 2016 Analysis of Impediments • Convene a panel of banks and advocacy organizations, such as the Greenlining Coalition, to develop recommendations on how to promote lending in areas with relatively high concentrations of racial/ethnic minority residents • Promote credit and personal finance education among high school students in areas with high concentrations of black and Hispanic students, focusing on the effective use of consumer debt and methods to build and maintain good credit. • Continue to explore opportunities for potential partnerships with non-profit entities to support the development of a land bank or community land trust to acquire properties for rehabilitation and/or development of affordable and mixed-income housing. • Consider funding, matching funds, training programs and Section 3 opportunities for small business loan investment, and to prepare small businesses for loans, in areas with high concentrations of racial and ethnic minority residents and households living in poverty. • Continue to explore development of a Transit Oriented Affordable Housing Loan Fund, which could pool local, state, federal, and private Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) sources to support mixed-income housing in areas with high concentrations of minority residents and households living in poverty. • Publicize the results of the Fair Housing Council’s recent study as part of the fair housing outreach and education efforts the City will undertake to address impediments identified above. • Partner with the Fair Housing Council to provide additional fair housing testing and related enforcement actions. Discriminatory Impediments • Failure to make reasonable modification or accommodation. • Low use of available fair housing resources/infrastructure. Recommendations provided in the 2016 Analysis of Impediments • Conduct outreach and education to area landlords, in partnership with local and state organizations such as the California Apartment Association, relating to reasonable accommodation requirements under the Fair Housing Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, and other related legislation. • Include information relating to the ADA, and fair housing more generally, among licensing materials for new landlords. • Conduct accessibility audits among newly constructed multifamily housing units in partnership with the Fair Housing Council of Central California. • Promote the provision of disabled-accessible units and housing for persons with mental and physical disabilities. 146 • Accommodate persons with disabilities who seek reasonable waiver or modification of land use controls and/or development standards pursuant to procedures and criteria set forth in the Development Code. • Build and maintain a database of housing units that have been rehabilitated and modified for accessibility and make the list available to organizations working to house residents with disabilities. • Include a web page on the city website detailing the rights and responsibilities of city residents under federal and state fair housing law, and hyperlinks to a variety of fair housing resources, including complaint forms for HUD and the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing. • Use CDBG to fund specific Fair Housing education and outreach in areas of concentration. • Through continuing contract with the Fair Housing Council of Central California, provide fair housing services that include advertising fair housing laws and complaint procedures in multiple languages through literature displays at City and County offices and through local non-profit groups. 147 148 CHAPTER 10. IDENTIFICATION OF IMPEDIMENTS Described below are the fair housing impediments identified in this Analysis of Impediments, along with associated contributing factors. Contributing factors are issues leading to an impediment that are likely to limit or deny fair housing choice or access to opportunity. Recommended activities to address the contributing factors are provided in Table 29, along with implementation timeframes and responsible parties. Impediment 1: Lack of Safety Net Programs for Renters Increases Housing Instability Among Protected Classes Safety net and early intervention programs are critical needs for persons at risk of homelessness. Programs that provide emergency rent or relocation assistance can safeguard families against eviction. The report Evicted in Fresno found that while rent burden and poverty are significant factors in determining when an eviction will occur, evictions in Fresno are more prevalent in areas where populations are predominantly Hispanic, Asian and Black. When researchers tested the adequacy of existing local rent assistance programs, they found that providers either served exclusive groups of recipients, e.g. married couples or members of the Christian faith only, or were severely underfunded. The report noted that one program estimated it turned away between 20-50 families per week who were seeking rental assistance. Given that the report found there were approximately 45 evictions per week in Fresno in 2016 (2,342 total), additional supports to safety net and early intervention programs could significantly reduce the number of evictions throughout the city, particularly in predominantly non-white neighborhoods where residents are hardest hit by evictions. Multi-lingual early intervention services can also assist families living in substandard housing, who have difficulty advocating for themselves. Stakeholders noted that residents who have limited English proficiency, or who are undocumented, are less likely to complain about substandard housing and face increased housing instability due to their difficulty in advocating for themselves. Materials on tenant’s rights and assistance with substandard housing issues should be made available in several languages, using methods that are culturally sensitive and effective. Impediment 2: Insufficient Employment Supports Leave Residents of Color with Lower Incomes and Limited Housing Choices Opportunity Index data in Chapter 5 points to moderate disparities in labor market engagement (a HUD-defined index based on labor force participation, educational attainment, and employment) and school proficiency among racial and ethnic groups in Fresno. In particular, Hispanic, Black, Asian or Pacific Islander, and Native American populations are more likely to reside in areas with lower levels of labor market engagement and school proficiency and higher levels of poverty. Low levels of labor market engagement and school proficiency drive down wages, thus restricting housing choice and access to opportunity. Combined, the city’s low labor 149 market engagement among protected classes and moderate segregation levels contribute to racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty in Fresno. Place-based strategies allow for the targeting of resources and outreach efforts to areas with high proportions of residents whose housing choices may be limited by low earnings or unemployment. These strategies can be combined with other approaches focused on closing skills gaps and developing career pathways, increasing job creation and quality standards, and raising the wage floor. Examples of place-based strategies to increase labor market engagement include increasing awareness of high-growth jobs that pay family-sustaining wages and connections to the training necessary to obtain them; expanding public transportation routes, lengthening service hours, and expanding transportation options between areas with high concentrations of low-earning workers; and targeting neighborhoods with high proportions of low-earning workers as priorities for interventions that increase awareness of available subsidies and resources.61 Planning efforts underway in the city and region identify gaps and provide recommendations for increasing labor market engagement and earnings in Fresno, with opportunities ranging from pre-natal and early childhood interventions to adult education opportunities. In particular, the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan (2019) notes that weaknesses in workforce readiness include low educational attainment and lack of credentials as barriers for workers in achieving employment; shortages of skilled workers to meet employment demand; gaps in higher education capacity; low levels of kindergarten readiness; insufficient access to quality healthcare for mothers and families of color; and insufficient access to programs and services through early childhood, which impacts growth and development into adulthood. Efforts to address these gaps are vital to improving labor market engagement among protected classes in Fresno and thus to increasing housing choice and economic mobility in the city. Impediment 3: Continued Need for Neighborhood Infrastructure Development and Expanded Access to Opportunity in Areas of Concentrated Poverty A lack of access to neighborhood infrastructure and opportunity in areas of concentrated poverty presents additional barriers to fair housing in Fresno. Disparities exist among the city’s neighborhoods with regard to access to quality schools; parks and environmental quality; streets and sidewalks; and grocery stores and other retail establishments. Neighborhoods with higher proportions of white residents tend to have greater access to opportunities relative to those with higher proportions of other racial and ethnic groups. Overall, moderate levels of segregation in the city combined with low levels of access to needed infrastructure and amenities in areas of concentrated poverty contribute to fair housing concerns. Data presented in chapter 5, including maps and input from meetings, interviews, focus groups, and the community survey, indicate that neighborhoods with high poverty levels and those with higher proportions of residents of color tend to have lower levels of access to neighborhood infrastructure and opportunity: 61 Nelson, M., Wolf-Powers, L., & Fisch, J. (2015). Persistent low wages in New Orleans’ economic resurgence: policies for improving earnings for the working poor. In The Data Center. (2015). New Orleans Index at 10. 150 • The School Proficiency Index indicates disparities in access to quality schools among racial and ethnic groups in Fresno and shows that white residents have greater access to quality schools than residents of other racial and ethnic groups. • When asked whether a variety of community resources are provided equally in the city, 60 percent of respondents noted that parks and trails are not equally provided; 52 percent noted that grocery stores and other shopping are not equally provided; and 48 percent indicated that roads and sidewalks are not equally provided. • The City’s Parks Vision Plan finds that approximately half of Fresno’s residents do not live within walking distance of a park and that areas of the city with high poverty rates and with higher proportions of residents of color tend to also contain neighborhood amenities in poor condition or to lack park space altogether. • Environmental health data further indicate that brownfields and toxic sites are more commonly located in these neighborhoods as well, so that in addition to having lower levels of access to areas of opportunity, residents in high-poverty neighborhoods are also more likely to be within close proximity to environmental health hazards. • Overall, 67 percent of survey respondents noted ‘neighborhoods that need revitalization and new investment’ as an impediment to fair housing in Fresno, ranking it as the third greatest barrier to fair housing in Fresno, second only to ‘not enough affordable housing for individuals’ and ‘not enough affordable housing for families.’ Together, these measures indicate that a lack of access to quality neighborhood infrastructure in areas of concentrated poverty restrict access to fair housing choice by limiting opportunity for residents living in these areas. As public investment in neighborhood infrastructure such as schools, parks, streets, sidewalks, and environmental quality drives private investment, a lack of public investment poses barriers to residents’ housing choice by creating disparities in access to opportunity across city neighborhoods. To address disparities in neighborhood infrastructure and associated lack of access to opportunity, meeting attendees, survey respondents, and stakeholders interviewed in the course of this planning process emphasized the need for continued investment in neighborhoods with high concentrations of poverty. Respondents rated street, road, and sidewalk improvements and homeless and domestic violence shelters as the greatest public facility and infrastructure needs, followed by community parks, gyms, and recreational fields. Further, to address these geographic disparities in investment in Fresno, there is a need to approach planning and investment decisions with an equity lens and to further engage communities in areas of concentrated poverty regarding community needs and priorities. Impediment 4: Poor Housing Conditions Limit Housing Options for Some Protected Classes Concerns regarding the poor condition of existing rental housing stock in some areas of the city, together with the difficulties faced by disabled and elderly homeowners in maintaining their homes, were frequently raised among the stakeholders and members of the public who contributed to this AI. In the community survey conducted along with this AI, “help for homeowners to make housing improvements” and “rehabilitation of rental housing” were the second and fourth (respectively) highest-ranked housing needs in the city. 151 Multiple participants cited landlords’ failure to maintain their properties as a primary cause of poor rental housing conditions. In these cases, landlords were said to be letting their properties fall into disrepair and refusing to make necessary improvements or making only minor, “band aid” fixes. This issue has a disproportionate impact on the city’s lowest-income households (frequently households of color) who cannot afford the cost of moving, let alone the cost of higher-quality housing elsewhere. Undocumented tenant households who reside in substandard rental properties seldom have viable options to have their housing quality concerns addressed. Pointing problems out to their landlord could result in retaliation; reporting deficiencies to code enforcement could result in the property being condemned and the tenant family becoming homeless. Other times landlords make minimal corrections to satisfy code enforcement but do not address overarching problems with housing quality. For these and many other reasons, many housing conditions go unreported and undetected, leaving low-income and immigrant households with few alternative housing choices. Other stakeholders and meeting attendees suggested the City’s investment in homeowner rehabilitation assistance is insufficient to meet the need. People with disabilities and the elderly struggle to make home repairs themselves and, due to limited incomes, are often unable to afford contractors to perform needed work. The City could do more with its entitlement funding by focusing more resources on substantial home repair programs rather than cosmetic issues such as exterior painting. Funding housing rehabilitation and new construction, particularly as an infill option in existing neighborhoods, should help to address poor housing quality in Fresno. Programs to assist people with disabilities with the costs of accessibility modifications to their properties could also improve housing quality and extend the usefulness of the existing housing supply. Impediment 5: Racial Disparities Limit Access to Homeownership for Some Protected Classes Many households desire homeownership as a housing option in order to build equity and increase stability. However, homeownership rates and data regarding home mortgage applications indicate significantly more barriers to purchasing a home for households of color, particularly African American and other race households, than for white households in Fresno. About 62% of white households in the city own their homes, while homeownership rates for other racial and ethnic groups range from 27% for African Americans to 38% for Latinos to 53% for “other race” households. Similar disparities exist in Fresno County, where white households are 2.3 times as likely to own their homes than are Black households. While many factors such as income, wealth, and credit history impact homeownership, data examined in this report provide evidence that white households are both more likely to apply for mortgages, more likely to complete their mortgage applications, and more likely to see their applications approved than other racial and ethnic groups. Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data shows that all other racial and ethnic groups are more likely to be denied a mortgage loan than are white applicants, regardless of income. The most notable disparity is between white and African American applicants. At low and middle incomes, Black applicants are 1.5 times as likely to be denied a loan as white applicants; at high incomes, they are 2.2 times as likely to be denied. 152 The City can address these disparities using a variety of approaches. Any homeownership programs supported by the City through either CDBG or HOME (for example, production of new, for-sale units using HOME funds) should be affirmatively marketed to communities of color, including residents with limited English proficiency, in Fresno. The City could also explore opportunities for partnership with a local housing counseling agency to connect participants of other City programs with homebuyer counseling, when appropriate. In addition to working with prospective homebuyers, the City can conduct outreach to lenders, encourage them to collaborate in achieving the City’s goals for affirmatively furthering fair housing, or consider implementing a more formal responsible lending program. Impediment 6: Publicly Supported Housing Options Are Concentrated Outside of Areas of Opportunity Northwest and northeast Fresno appear to limit a variety of affordable housing options, particularly those offered by the Housing Authority of the City of Fresno (FH). Traditional public housing developments, LIHTC developments, Project Based Section 8, Sections 202 and 811 housing, and housing choice vouchers are either extremely limited or non-existent in NW and NE Fresno, where the population is predominantly white. Instead, publicly supported units are primarily located in census tracts with non-white majorities. Hispanic, Black, and Asian households make up 87% of all City of Fresno voucher holders and 71% of residents receiving project based rental assistance. Despite FH’s use of housing navigators to help housing choice voucher users exercise more mobility, stakeholders observe that vouchers continue to be concentrated in 2-3 primary neighborhoods. According to FH staff, approximately 50% of voucher holders successfully find rental units, down from an 80% success rate around the year 2000. The lack of affordable housing in northwest and northeast Fresno has the effect of excluding both low-income racial and ethnic minorities, as well as low-income white residents, from areas of opportunity. The City of Fresno and its housing partners should expand access to affordable housing and neighborhood opportunity by working to locate additional affordable units in NW and NE Fresno. In addition to siting decisions by housing providers, NIMBYism in north Fresno may have historically been a strong contributing factor to the lack of publicly supported housing options in these neighborhoods. Impediment 8 more directly addresses NIMBYism and other community attitudes as an additional barrier to fair housing. Impediment 7: Many Communications and Marketing Efforts Regarding Fair Housing Are Not Effectively Targeted to Protected Classes and Non-English Speakers Fresno has multiple populations with limited English proficiency (LEP) and diverse racial, ethnic, and immigrant populations with varying cultural customs, traditions, and communication styles. One in six Fresno residents primarily speaks a language other than English. Spanish-speakers comprise 70% of the LEP population and Hmong-speaking residents make up 12%. The top languages spoken by other LEP residents include other Indic languages (such as Urdu, Bengali, and Punjabi) and Laotian. 153 While the City has worked to engage these LEP communities by providing translations of information when needed and by making interpreters available for public meetings, residents who attended community meetings suggested that there are opportunities for the City to improve on its strategy through an ongoing, relationship-based approach. Offerings of translation and interpretation tend to be one-way communication options – a way for the City to make residents aware of information rather than a means of engaging LEP residents in dialogue. These types of approaches are also most commonly employed on the City’s terms (i.e. when the City wishes to announce information or collect input) but may not be as available to residents at other times. A more inclusive public engagement model depends upon building ongoing relationships within LEP communities, often with a designated liaison who builds trust over time between the LEP population and the City staff. The liaison participates in regular events within the community, listens to concerns and criticism and is a conduit between these communities and the City. This liaison will then understand and be able to design culturally appropriate approaches to involving LEP residents in the full spectrum of government processes, opening an ongoing, two-way avenue for exchange of information and ideas. Enhancing the City’s strategies for engaging with its LEP communities makes City government, planning processes, and decision-making more responsive to the input of LEP communities and increases the access of non-English-speakers to public resources, including fair housing information. Impediment 8: NIMBYism and Prejudice Reduces Housing Choice for Protected Classes While Impediment 6 discussed affordable housing siting decisions by the City and its partners, this impediment addresses community attitudes that inhibit housing options for protected classes, including racial and ethnic minorities and immigrants. Public input indicated that attitudes and perceptions about multifamily housing, affordable housing, and homelessness in Fresno impact housing development and housing choice. Many stakeholders interviewed for this research noted that developing multifamily housing – affordable or market rate – in north Fresno is difficult due to pushback and Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) sentiments expressed by some residents. In addition, some stakeholders noted that, as people of color or south Fresno residents, they would not feel comfortable moving to a neighborhood in the northern part of the city, even if they desired to move and housing was available, because of likely mistreatment and/or racism by some neighbors. In general, stakeholders tended to perceive the city as segregated and noted that housing discrimination is likely occurring. Other stakeholders noted discrimination by neighbors against members of the LGBTQ community. One-fifth of survey respondents reported experiencing housing discrimination in Fresno, and 73% believe housing discrimination is an issue or is somewhat of an issue in the city. Impediment 9: Individuals Not Understanding Their Housing Rights May Prevent Access to Fair Housing Knowledge of fair housing rights and resources is generally good in Fresno relative to many other jurisdictions in the country. Many public meeting attendees and stakeholders who were interviewed for this research knew of one or more appropriate organizations in the region who assist with fair housing issues, including Central California Legal Services, the Fair Housing 154 Council, and HUD. However, some stakeholders noted that while social service and housing agency staff have knowledge of fair housing resources, the general public is likely to be less informed about them. In the survey conducted as part of this AI, 93% of respondents reported that they know or somewhat know their fair housing rights, although about 38% would not know where to file a housing discrimination complaint. The number of calls and complaints processed by the Fair Housing Council of Central California also speaks to need for ongoing education and enforcement efforts. In the second half of 2018 and first half of 2019, FHCCC logged 508 calls resulting in 243 complaint investigations. Future fair housing education efforts should ensure that Fresno’s most vulnerable groups are aware of available resources, including people of color, immigrants, residents with limited English proficiency, people with disabilities and LGBTQ populations. Another key component of future fair housing education and enforcement efforts should be informing voucher holders and landlords/property managers about California’s recently enacted law prohibiting refusal to accept a Section 8 voucher. Stakeholder input indicates that prior to this law going into effect on January 1, 2020, many landlords would not take vouchers and they would be unaware of the law or unwilling to comply voluntarily once the law took effect. 152 TABLE 29 – FAIR HOUSING GOALS AND ACTIVITIES Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 1: Lack of Safety Net Programs for Renters Increases Housing Instability Among Protected Classes Evictions affect low-income and severely rent burdened residents at high rates. • Create an Emergency Rent and Relocation Demonstration Program. a. The City should create a demonstration program or partner with an existing non- profit to provide emergency rent assistance and legal assistance to tenants on the verge of eviction. (Q3, 2021) • Capture and monitor eviction data within the jurisdiction in order to develop future policy solutions for managing evictions in target areas. (Q1, 2021) • As patterns emerge from eviction data, the City should identify, research and adopt additional anti-displacement policies that are not covered under AB 1482. (Q3, 2021) City of Fresno Limited English Proficiency and Immigration status create additional barriers to quality housing • Address substandard housing and other fair housing issues through the City’s Immigrant Affairs Committee. a. The City should partner with a local community organization to create and distribute materials in various languages regarding tenants’ rights and ways to obtain assistance with substandard housing issues. (Q4, 2020) City of Fresno 153 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 2: Insufficient Employment Supports Leave Residents of Color with Lower Incomes and Limited Housing Choices Educational and employment barriers limit economic opportunities • Continue working with partners on funding and implementation of the economic development, human capital, and neighborhood development strategies contained in the Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • As described in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan, work with community partners to raise funds to remove financial barriers to training for Fresno residents and to remove barriers to employment. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • As described in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan, work with community partners to form a regional coordinating entity that connects educators, industries, workers, and students to provide high-quality, paid work-based learning for all learners in the Fresno region. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • As described in the Greater Fresno Regional Drive Plan, work with community stakeholders to increase the scale of 1:1 workforce navigator programs, focusing on target populations in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Provide vouchers for public transportation and alternative transportation options to support low-income individuals in obtaining and maintaining employment. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Invest in wrap-around services to support homeless individuals in obtaining and maintaining employment in addition to accessing housing and other needed services. (Ongoing, beginning, 2020) • Work with local adult / continuing education providers and job search assistance agencies to better identify barriers their students / clients face. Consider opportunities to use CDBG funding to address potential barriers and locating services in low- and moderate-income census tracts. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Target neighborhoods with high proportions of low-earning workers as priorities for interventions that increase awareness of available subsidies and resources. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Direct any economic development subsidies to companies paying living wages and engaging in local hiring. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Continue providing CDBG or other funding for youth education enrichment activities to encourage reading proficiency, high school completion, career and/or college preparation, and other education components, including full-day programs to support parents in maintaining employment in low- and moderate-income census tracts. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) City of Fresno 154 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 2 (continued): Insufficient Employment Supports Leave Residents of Color with Lower Incomes and Limited Housing Choices Low levels of kindergarten readiness; insufficient access to programs and services through early childhood; and insufficient access to quality healthcare for mothers and families of color • Provide CDBG or other funding for youth education enrichment activities and other early childhood programs and services to encourage kindergarten readiness, reading proficiency, and other aspects of child growth and development. (Ongoing) • Provide CDBG or other funding to support access to quality healthcare, with a focus on quality care for low-income mothers and families of color. (Beginning Q1, 2021) City of Fresno 155 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 3: Continued Need for Neighborhood Infrastructure Development and Expanded Access to Opportunity in Areas of Concentrated Poverty Continued need for neighborhood reinvestment in low- and moderate-income census tracts • Continue to fund projects that develop, expand, or improve sidewalks, parks, trails, and other public facilities in low- and moderate-income census tracts with high need for these improvements (see, e.g., neighborhood amenity gaps mapping in the Fresno Parks Vision Plan). (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Consider implementing mechanisms to increase and make consistent funding for parks and other infrastructure improvements in low- and moderate-income census tracts. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • Target investment of CDBG funds in RECAPs. (Ongoing) • As described in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan, work with community partners to form a coalition to implement complete streets improvements and plan for equitable Transit-Oriented Development in south and west Fresno. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) City of Fresno Areas of the City are underserved with regard to access to services, grocery and other neighborhood- oriented retail • Continue City promotion of Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Tracts as Opportunity Zones for the purpose of attracting businesses. (Ongoing) • Continue to provide economic development support such as infrastructure assistance for new small businesses that fill market niches and create jobs. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • As described in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan, develop a Neighborhood Loan Fund focused on increasing availability of capital to underserved populations using a peer-lending strategy, with a focus on south and west Fresno. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) • As described in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE Plan, develop a revolving loan fund that will provide low-interest financing for new businesses; existing businesses looking to adapt, improve, and expand their operations; and property owners trying to make their building lease-ready. Focus efforts on south and west Fresno. (Ongoing, beginning 2020) City of Fresno 156 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 3 (Continued): Continued Need for Neighborhood Infrastructure Development and Expanded Access to Opportunity in Areas of Concentrated Poverty Equity issues are not routinely and consistently considered in planning and policymaking • Create an office of equity and inclusion to review policy and budget decision impacts on RECAPs and neighborhoods of color. (2021) • Develop an evaluation tool focused on maximizing equitable outcomes for use in review of development and policy decisions (e.g. the King County Housing Development Consortium’s Racial Equity Impact Tool). (Q3, 2020) • Develop an equity assessment tool to prioritize locations for investment in public infrastructure and facilities (e.g., Seattle’s Equity and Environment Agenda and Environmental Equity Assessment Pilot; NYC Parks Framework for an Equitable Future). (Q3, 2020) • Train City staff in use of these tools to ensure incorporation into City decision-making processes. (Q4, 2020) • Publicly track progress on equity issues, including metrics detailed in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE plan (e.g., City of Philadelphia Greenworks Dashboard). (Q3, 2020) • As the City’s General Plan is routinely updated, staff in the respective CDBG program offices should review the proposed housing element updates and comment to planning staff on any concerns related to equity of planning policies or development plans. (Ongoing, beginning Q3, 2020) City of Fresno Need to further engage communities in south and west Fresno in planning decisions • Expand community engagement efforts focused on community needs and priorities in south and west Fresno, including working with residents and community groups to shape the City’s approach to community engagement. As detailed in the Greater Fresno Regional DRIVE plan, implement targeted outreach to engage with end users to identify areas for investment. (Ongoing, beginning Q2, 2020) • Focus community engagement and dialogue in part on the role of race/ethnicity and economic mobility in Fresno. (Q3, 2020) City of Fresno 157 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 4: Housing Options for Some Protected Classes Are Limited by Poor Housing Conditions Landlords in some neighborhoods fail to adequately maintain and improve rental properties • Continue to monitor the effectiveness of the City’s new Rental Housing Improvement Program and revise program standards and procedures as may be needed to keep the program working successfully, to maintain enforcement, and to ensure rental properties are enrolling as required. (Annually, beginning Q4 2020) • Consider a rental rehabilitation program that would provide incentives to landlords to maintain their rental properties in good repair. (Q1 2021) • With input from code enforcement officers and homeless service providers, develop a protocol for ensuring tenant households reporting code violations are protected from homelessness as a result of displacement from substandard housing pursuant to code enforcement action. (Q3 2021) City of Fresno Low-income households, including the elderly and people with disabilities, have difficulty making needed home repairs • Continue using HUD funding to support housing rehabilitation programs; consider focusing resources on substantial and necessary repairs that will extend the useful life of the housing rehabilitated. (Ongoing, beginning Q3 2020) • Work with the nonprofit community to support programs that assist people with disabilities with the cost of accessibility modifications to their homes. (Annually, beginning Q1 2021) City of Fresno 158 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 5: Racial Disparities Exist in Access to Homeownership Lower shares of African American and Latino households apply for home mortgage loans than white households • Ensure that opportunities to participate in City of Fresno homebuyer opportunities, including those operated by Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs) and funded through CDBG and HOME money, are affirmatively marketed to people of color, immigrants, and people with limited English proficiency. (Ongoing, beginning Q3 2020) • Facilitate partnerships between local social service and housing agencies, including the Fresno Housing Authority, to connect eligible families with possible homeownership opportunities. (Ongoing, beginning Q1 2021) • Continue exploring educational opportunities focused on building and maintaining credit, personal finances, and the homeownership process. Continue City efforts identified in previous CAPERs to promote credit and personal finance education among high school students. (Ongoing, beginning Q4 2020) • Continue funding development of affordable housing for homeownership through CHDOs and other affordable housing providers using HOME funds. Require subrecipients to affirmatively market available homeownership opportunities to households throughout Fresno, including people of color, immigrants, and people with limited English proficiency. (Ongoing, beginning Q3 2020) City of Fresno People of color, most notably African Americans, are more likely to be denied home mortgage loans than white applicants • Build on recent efforts to bring the banking and lending community to the table to improve mortgage lending outcomes for applicants of color. In recent years, the FHCCC held meetings to review Community Re-Investment Act (CRA) obligations. Continuing this conversation, convene a working group of local bankers to identify collaborative steps the City, lenders, and other local housing agencies could take to both increase the completion rate of loan applications and reduce the denial rates. (Q1, 2021) • Consider/evaluate the need for a responsible banking program that would use distribution of government financial relationships (within banking regulations) to incentivize fair lending by financial institutions. (Q4, 2021) City of Fresno 159 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 6: Publicly Supported Housing Options Are Concentrated Outside of Areas of Opportunity Affordable housing, including publicly supported housing, is limited, particularly in desirable areas where neighborhoods offer enhanced access to some types of opportunity • As outlined in Impediment 3, develop and implement an equity assessment tool to use in review of development and policy decisions to promote a broad view of any proposed multifamily, mixed-income, or affordable housing throughout the city, including in north Fresno. (Q4 2020) • In coordination with statewide housing planning regulations, update the Housing Element of the City’s General Plan to ensure that an appropriate amount of land is zoned for multifamily housing in locations throughout the City. (Q1 2021) a. Consider further housing element and/or development code updates that would encourage alternatives to large lot sizes (such as cluster developments, density blending, zero lot line developments, and transfer of development rights) and up-zone single-family detached districts to increase the density allowed in existing neighborhoods without property owners having to obtain a variance or other special approval. (Q1 2021) • New affordable housing development, whether by the cities with CDBG or HOME funds, the local housing authorities, or private-sector LIHTC developers should be given priority consideration when it will be located in an area that increases access to new types of opportunity not generally available in neighborhoods where existing affordable housing is located. (Ongoing, beginning Q3, 2020) City of Fresno Partners: Housing Authority of the City of Fresno Housing Choice Voucher use is limited in NE and NW Fresno, including many neighborhoods that offer enhanced access to some types of opportunity Education is needed about recent statewide legislation requiring rental housing managers / owners to accept Housing Choice Vouchers • As outlined in Impediment 9, work with partners such as local fair housing agencies, media outlets, and the Fresno Housing Authority to publicize new state requirements regarding accepting Section 8 vouchers to landlords and property managers, with a focus on independent landlords not affiliated with larger property management companies. (Q4, 2020) • As outlined in Impediment 9, work with the Fresno Housing Authority to raise awareness among voucher holders and the general public regarding new requirements regarding acceptance of Section 8 vouchers. (Ongoing, beginning Q2, 2020) City of Fresno Partners: Housing Authority of the City of Fresno 160 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 7: Many Communications and Marketing Efforts Regarding Fair Housing Are Not Effectively Targeted to Protected Classes and Non-English Speakers Limited English proficiency among large segments of Fresno’s population limits opportunities for two-way engagement with the City • The City should begin building the infrastructure for a stronger, more sustainable relationship-based community engagement approach. a. Consider whether existing staff can be devoted to role(s) as liaisons to LEP communities or whether this may necessitate creating a new dedicated staff position (e.g. Eugene, Oregon’s Multicultural Liaison). (Q1 2021) b. Consider opportunities to hold periodic community-wide events for the purpose of engaging with multicultural groups (e.g. Plano, Texas’s Multicultural Outreach Roundtable). (Q1, 2021) c. Consider opportunities to align the development of an enhanced multicultural engagement strategy with the work of the DRIVE initiative. (Q1, 2021) d. Formalize the resulting enhanced engagement strategies in a policy along with guidelines and a listing of tools available to assist with implementation (e.g. Seattle, Washington’s Inclusive Outreach and Engagement Guide) (Q4, 2021) • Provide cultural competency training to all Fresno HCD staff beginning with those in public-facing roles, but expanding to back-office and management as well. (Q4, 2021) City of Fresno 161 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 8: NIMBYism and Prejudice Reduces Housing Choice for Protected Classes Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) attitudes limit multifamily and affordable housing development in North Fresno • Develop and deliver community education around the concept of affordable housing and its cultural and economic value to the community. a. Develop an adaptable slide deck and presentation on the subject of the value of affordable housing, including qualitative and quantitative arguments. (Q1, 2021) b. Establish a small “speakers bureau” of designated city staff or other community partners to deliver the presentation to local groups. (Q2, 2021) • Market the presentation and available speakers to community groups such as neighborhood/homeowners’ associations, Rotary and other similar clubs, and associations of Realtors, homebuilders, and lenders. (Ongoing, beginning Q2, 2021) • Consider conducting a tour of successful affordable housing properties in Fresno for local leaders and other interested parties to build public support for additional affordable housing development. (Q2 2021) City of Fresno Stakeholder input indicated that prejudiced attitudes by some community members impacts housing choice • A broad-based and trusted local convening institution should be enlisted to create and offer a periodic diversity, equity, and inclusion training aimed at local community leaders and other interested parties. One training session could be combined with staff training on the proposed equity assessment tool as a two-part course. (Q2 2021) • Explore options for communitywide events or programing that celebrate Fresno’s diversity and encourage interaction among diverse participants in neighborhoods throughout the city. (Q4 2020) City of Fresno 162 Contributing Factors Recommended Activities, Goals, and Timeframes Responsible Parties and Partners Impediment 9: Continued Need for Fair Housing Education and Enforcement Public input and data on housing discrimination complaint calls and filings indicate that more fair housing education is needed for landlords and lenders • Through a contracted fair housing agency, provide education and outreach to landlords, property owners, property managers, and lenders. (Ongoing, beginning Q2, 2020) a. Work with the agency annually to develop and deliver a fair housing education program that uses innovative ways to reach housing industry professionals on a variety of fair housing topics. b. Continue holding community-wide events, including the Fair Housing Conference, that convenes housing industry professionals to learn about fair housing rights and responsibilities and updated fair housing laws. • Work with partners such as local fair housing agencies, media outlets, and the Fresno Housing Authority to publicize new state requirements regarding accepting Section 8 vouchers to landlords and property managers. Connect landlords with questions regarding the new law to appropriate resources. (Q4, 2020) • Consider requiring landlords or property managers found to be in violation of city codes or other regulations to attend a fair housing training session as part of the requirements to cure the code / regulatory violation. (Q2, 2021) City of Fresno Public input and data on housing discrimination complaint calls and filings indicate that more fair housing education is needed the general public • Through a contracted fair housing agency, annually design and coordinate delivery of a fair housing education program that reaches the public with information about fair housing rights and responsibilities, how to recognize discrimination, and how and where to file a complaint. (Ongoing, beginning Q2 2020) a. Focus on working through local agencies (social service providers, churches, community organizations, etc.) to meet residents in locations where they are comfortable. b. Conduct outreach to local agencies serving immigrants, refugees, and other populations with limited English proficiency to collaborate on approaches to provide fair housing education and enforcement for these groups. c. Work with the Fresno Housing Authority to raise awareness among voucher holders and the general public regarding new requirements regarding acceptance of Section 8 vouchers. • Continue funding a local fair housing agency to accept fair housing calls and investigate complaints. Publicize this agency and how to contact them as part of the fair housing education effort. Review capacity to handle complaints in languages other than English to ensure ability to assist all Fresno residents. (Ongoing, beginning Q2, 2020) City of Fresno APPENDIX A: PUBLIC NOTICES AND CITIZEN OUTREACH Outreach Activities in Support of the November 2019 Workshops and Community Needs Survey • Public notice in the Fresno Bee and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle • Utility bill inserts distributed to 130,000 utility customers in the City of Fresno • Advertisement in CUSD Today (Central Unified School District newsletter) • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers • Digital distribution of flyers to Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools for schools located in the City of Fresno • Project website (www.FresnoConPlanAI.com) logged 818 unique visitors and 994 visits • Facebook posts reached 1,123 individuals and drove 21 engagements • Twitter posts reached 9,652 individuals and drove 45 engagements • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue Public Notice - English Public Notice - Spanish Utility Bill Inserts – English, Spanish, Hmong Utility bill inserts distributed to 130,000 utility customers in the City of Fresno Utility Bill Inserts (Continued) – English, Spanish, Hmong Advertisement Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) - Spanish Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) – Hmong Project Website: www.FresnoConPlanAI.com Social Media - Twitter Social Media – Facebook (separate post for each meeting) Media Calendar Posts Media Calendar Posts (Continued) Outreach Activities in Support of the February 13, 2020 Workshop • Printed flyers distributed at 18 community and neighborhood centers • Digital distribution of flyers to Fresno Unified School District, Clovis Unified School District, and Sanger Unified School District schools for schools located in the City of Fresno and sent home with children at select schools near the sites of meetings • Project website (www.FresnoConPlanAI.com) logged 818 unique visitors and 994 visits • Facebook post reached 2,400 individuals and drove 62 engagements • Twitter post reached 2,285 individuals and drove 36 engagements • Nextdoor post reached 9,761 individuals • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients, 12 Community Development Corporations located in the City of Fresno, Central California Legal Services, and Fair Housing Council of Central California • Publication on local media calendars of local news organizations including ABC 30 KFSN, CBS 47 KGPE, NBC 24 KSEE, Fox 26 KMPH, KBIF 900 AM, and Radio Bilingue. Flyer (Distributed in Print and Digital) Project Website: www.FresnoConPlanAI.com Social Media – Facebook (separate post for each meeting) Social Media – Twitter Social Media – Nextdoor Email Distribution Digital Flyer Distribution Example Outreach Activities in Support of Public Comment Period & Public Hearings Public Notice of Comment Period – February 21, 2020 • Public Notice of Comment Period & Public Hearings published in The Fresno Bee on February 21, 2020, and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle on February 26, 2020 • Printed notices posted at 18 community and neighborhood centers & Fresno County Libraries • Notice read on-air in Hmong on radio station KBIF • Public workshop with Housing & Community Development Commission held on February 27, 2020 • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Notice posted on the City Clerk’s website Public Review Documents • Draft public review documents distributed to 18 community and neighborhood centers & 11 Fresno County Libraries between February 28, 2020 and March 2, 2020 • Draft documents made available online at Fresno City Clerk website and City of Fresno Housing and Community Development website • Announcement and links to documents posted on Facebook and Twitter • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients First Extension of Public Comment Period • Public Notice extending end of comment period from March 31, 2020 to April 3, 2020 published in The Fresno Bee on March 4, 2020, and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle on March, 11, 2020 • Printed notices posted at 18 community and neighborhood centers & Fresno County Libraries • Notice read on-air in Hmong on radio station KBIF • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Notice posted on City Clerk’s website Notice of Continuation of Public Hearings • Public Notice regarding the continuation of Public Hearings from March 25 & April 9 to May 13 and 14 published in The Fresno Bee on March 24, 2020, and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle on April 8, 2020 • Notice read on-air in Hmong on radio station KBIF • Facebook event modified with new date and location & reposted • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Notice posted on the City Clerk’s website Second Extension of Public Comment Period • Public Notice extending end of comment period from March 31, 2020 to April 3, 2020 published in The Fresno Bee on March 4, 2020, and Spanish language newspaper Vida en el Valle on March, 11, 2020 • Notice read on-air in Hmong on radio station KBIF • Notice posted to Twitter • Email distribution to Housing and Community Development stakeholder list with 500+ recipients • Notice posted on City Clerk’s website Public Notice (Fresno Bee) Spanish Language Public Notice (Vida en el Valle) Spanish Language Public Notice (Vida en el Valle)- Continued Email to 500+ Stakeholders Social Media - Facebook Social Media – Twitter Email: Public Review Documents Available Email: Public Review Documents Available - Continued Public Notice: First Extension of Public Comment Period (Fresno Bee) Spanish Language Public Notice: First Extension of Public Comment Period (Vida en el Valle) Email: First Extension of Public Comment Period Public Notice: Continuation of Public Hearings (Fresno Bee) Spanish Language Public Notice: Continuation of Public Hearings (Vida en el Valle) Social Media - Facebook: Continuation of Public Hearings Email: Continuation of Public Hearings Email: Continuation of Public Hearings - Continued Email: Continuation of Public Hearings - Continued Public Notice: Second Extension of Public Comment Period (Fresno Bee) Public Notice: Second Extension of Public Comment Period (Vida en el Valle) Social Media - Twitter: Second Extension of Public Comment Period Email: Second Extension of Public Comment Period Public Comments and City Responses – 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Page 1 of 7 PUBLIC COMMENTS AND CITY RESPONSES 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan and 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan Appendix C Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Appendix B Comments received through May 18, 2020 and City responses are provided below. Additional comments received before the close of the Public Comment period on May 20, 2020 will be summarized by City staff and added to the official record for the May 21, 2020 City Council meeting, and appended to the final version of this document to be included with the submission of the plans to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) Public Hearing – May 13, 2020 Upon call for public comment, the following 2 people addressed the HCDC. 1. Sheng Xiong, Leadership Council for Justice and Accountability: Ms. Xiong noted that the Consolidated Plan presents a critical opportunity for the City to address the severe affordable housing needs in Fresno as well as the environmental and neighborhood health conditions that impact neighborhood health and wellbeing, and indicated she would be submitting additional written comments before the 20th. Ms. Xiong then expressed hope that the plan will address the following: promote new development of affordable housing and expand housing choice throughout Fresno, including locations in higher-income neighborhood and neighborhoods with fewer residents of color, rather than continuing to allow the concentration of housing affordable to low-income residents solely in low-income neighborhoods of color. The exclusion of other neighborhoods potentially conflicts with the City’s duty to affirmatively further fair housing under fair housing and civil rights laws; also with regard to residents wishing to remain in a community like Southwest Fresno that might not want to leave due to personal choice such as family ties- they deserve a consolidated plan that spends targeted investments of block grant funds and other resources available to decrease the disparity gap within the City of Fresno. Residents should not have to leave their community because the city has allowed severe disinvestment in these neighborhoods, many of which lack basic services and amenities such as sidewalks, street lights, curbs and gutters, grocery stores, retail outlets, and mixed and middle-income housing, and which exhibit high racially and ethnically concentrated poverty. Ms. Xiong indicated that her organization wants to assist the City in developing a prosperous final Analysis of Impediments that meets its objectives by analyzing and eliminating housing discrimination in the City of Fresno and promotes fair housing choice for all persons regardless of wealth, race, income, or place. [City Response: The public comment has been considered and accepted.] Public Comments and City Responses – 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Page 2 of 7 2. Mariah Thompson, Director of Central Valley National Lawyer’s Guild: Ms. Thompson asked why the plan specifies N/A for Goal Outcome Indicator for Fair Housing, unlike the other items for which more specific values are listed. Ms. Thompson then asked the City to further build out the section of the plan which discusses property that is owned by the City that could be utilized in achieving some of the goals of the plan, and expressed that there is a lot of opportunity there, especially if compared to the Housing Element. [City Response: The City has revised the plan to include information regarding the process under which parcels are considered for disposition by the City, including compliance with AB 1486 which requires priority consideration for affordable housing. The revision also includes information about parcels for which this process is currently underway and a list of land noted as vacant on the City’s current inventory. The City funds Fair Housing as an administrative activity. Administrative activities do not require goal outcome indicators under HUD guidelines. However, the City has accepted the comment and will consider preparing Fair Housing as a separate activity with specific goals in subsequent Annual Action Plans and Consolidated Plans. The public comment has been considered and accepted.] City Council Public Hearing – May 14, 2020 Upon call for public comment, the following 1 person addressed the City Council. 1. [Ivanka Saunders, Leadership Council for Justice and Accountability]: Ms. Saunders indicated that her organization wants to assist the City in developing a prosperous final Analysis of Impediments that meets its objectives by analyzing and eliminating housing discrimination in the City of Fresno and promotes fair housing choice for all persons. Ms. Saunders encouraged the City’s efforts in expanding its outreach and engagement strategies to include more workshops over a longer period of time to collect information from residents throughout Fresno, and noted this plan must analyze these concerns and adopt responsive actions and objectives that will effectively address these concerns so that residents continue to participate and feel that their concerns are actually being heard. The final plan must address how the City is using participants’ input in eliminating impediments to fair housing. Ms. Saunders noted that this draft plan provides a list of impediments and recommendations from the 2016 plan, but does not address which, if any, of those recommendations were actually implemented into policies and practices. Ms. Saunders stated that if recommendations were taken, it does not indicate who or how it benefited the recipients or if they reduced the impacts of these impediments, and indicated that the final plan must address if and how these recommendations led to any changes that reduce impediments. Ms. Saunders’s final comment was regarding identification of the impediments- although recommended activities and timelines are provided to describe the action steps that the city should take to address the impediments, it fails to establish measurable goals the city would use to assess the effectiveness and success of these actions, for example “raising awareness,” but without Public Comments and City Responses – 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Page 3 of 7 actual measurable results does not effectively address how the impediment will be eliminated or minimized. Ms. Saunders indicated that the final plan must include measurable goals which the City can use to assess their efforts to eliminate impediments and present the outcomes. [City Response: The document used to report on the City’s progress toward its goals for U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Planning and Development programs is the Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER). CAPERs are posted on the City’s Housing and Community Development website at http://www.fresno.gov/housing. The public comment has been considered and accepted.] Public Review Period Written Comments Received – February 28, 2020 – May 20, 2020 This appendix includes all comments available as of May 14, 2020; additional comments received will be summarized in a verbal presentation to City Council on May 21, 2020, will be provided to the City Clerk to be made part of the public record, and included in the final submission of the Plans to HUD. 1. Elisabeth Robledo: Email indicating lack of translation of plans provides a barrier in communication and equal participation of all shareholders (full email attached following this summary). [City Response: The City’s adopted Citizen Participation Plan does not require translation of public review documents. Although not required, the City provided Spanish and Hmong translation of notices and promotional materials, and interpretation services at community meetings and Public Hearings. The City will also provide Spanish and Hmong translations of the final Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. The draft documents were optimized for ADA/accessibility which allows for translations utilizing machine translation services. The City will assess cost-effective means of translating draft documents as well as revisions and final versions in the future. The public comment has been considered and accepted.] 2. Emily Brandt: Email asking why the Plans were not available in Spanish and Hmong- language versions given that agendas were (full email attached following this summary). [City Response: The City’s adopted Citizen Participation Plan does not require translation of public review documents. Although not required, the City provided Spanish and Hmong translation of notices and promotional materials, and interpretation services at community meetings and Public Hearings. The City will also provide Spanish and Hmong translations of the final Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Public Comments and City Responses – 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Page 4 of 7 Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. The draft documents were optimized for ADA/accessibility which allows for translations utilizing machine translation services. The City will assess cost-effective means of translating draft documents as well as revisions and final versions in the future. The public comment has been considered and accepted.] Public Comments and City Responses – 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Page 5 of 7 Exhibit 1: Email – Elisabeth Robledo (Page 1 of 2) Public Comments and City Responses – 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Page 6 of 7 Exhibit 1: Email – Elisabeth Robledo (Page 2 of 2) Public Comments and City Responses – 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan, and Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Page 7 of 7 Exhibit 2: Email – Emily Brandt City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID 20-00641 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:3-B REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL May 21, 2020 FROM:Jennifer K. Clark, Director Planning and Development Department THROUGH:Charles Clark, Chief Building Official and Building Services Manager Planning and Development Tom Morgan,Housing and Community Development Manager Planning and Development BY:Erika Lopez, Housing and Community Development Senior Management Analyst Planning and Development SUBJECT BILL - (For Introduction) Adding California Building Code Title 24 Appendix 0104 To Section 11-102 of the Fresno Municipal Code relating to Amendments to the California Building Code regarding Emergency Sleeping Cabins. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Ordinance amending Fresno Municipal Code (FMC)Section 11- 102 regarding Emergency Sleeping Cabins. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposed Ordinance amends FMC Section 11-102 to include revised standards for Emergency Sleeping Cabins during a shelter crisis in order to meet emergency housing demands for individuals needing essential,safe and sanitary shelter and diversion from homelessness.The proposed revisions would allow for expedited acquisition of Emergency Sleeping Cabins to move homeless individuals out of harsh climates and safely into shelter. BACKGROUND On December 6,2018,the City of Fresno (City)declared a shelter crisis.Since that time,there has not only been a dramatic increase in the homeless population,but also an increase in the amount of City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00641 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:3-B human waste, trash, open fires and crime, other harsh conditions in the City. The City adopted the 2019 California Building Code (CBC)on November 14,2019,including recommended language contained in Appendix O regarding Emergency Housing.Appendix O provides for Emergency Sleeping Cabins,defined as a relocatable hard-sided structures which may be occupied only for emergency housing,to be a minimum of 70 square feet for single occupancy and 120 square feet for double occupancy. The proposed local amendment to the CBC would revise the current suggested minimum standards of emergency sleeping cabins during a shelter crisis and allow the City or local non-profit entities to acquire these units and move homeless individuals out of harsh climates and safely into shelter within an accelerated timeline.The proposed amendment would revise the minimum interior floor area as follows: ·Double Occupancy: 120 square feet to 100 square feet ·Quad Occupancy: 220 square feet to 100 square feet The proposed amendment will limit the interior floor area of the emergency sleeping cabins to 100 square feet and up to 4 occupants.However,during a City-declared public health emergency a maximum of 2 occupants will be allowed within the 100 square foot emergency sleeping cabin.If the floor area is larger than 100 square feet,the CBC’s current recommendations of 70 square feet for single occupancy and 50 square feet for each additional occupant,up to 400 square feet will apply. Regardless of the square footage,five percent of all units and no less than one unit will be required to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act as stipulated in the 2019 CBC Section 11B and Appendix O,Section O107.The remaining recommended minimum standards pertaining to emergency sleeping cabins as set for in Appendix O104 for live loads,ceiling heights,egress and egress window,plumbing,electrical,ventilation,and smoke and carbon monoxide alarms will remain unchanged. The proposed changes to the minimum interior floor area will continue to meet health and safety standards,in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 17958.7 and 18941.5,in addition to addressing the following issues: 1.Human lives are at risk. The Fresno Madera County Continuum of Care 2019 Point in Time (PIT)count reported a total of 1,486 homeless individuals within the City.The 2019 PIT count of persons experiencing homelessness was found to have increased by 16.2%over the 2018 PIT count (1,279).Further, 1,152 of the homeless individuals were unsheltered,representing 23.2%increase in the number of unsheltered persons in the 2018 PIT count (935).As evidenced in the below table,harsh summer and winter climatic conditions in the City placed the health and lives of the unsheltered homeless at risk.These conditions warrant prompt action to provide shelter for the preservation of life and health. Summer Weather Extremes, 2019 June July August September Daily High Temperature above 100 degrees (days)7 15 18 7 Highest Daily Temperature (degrees)106 107 108 104 Average Monthly High Temperature (degrees)94 99 99 91 Monthly Precipitation (inches)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Winter Weather Extremes, 2019 November December January February Daily Low Temperature below 40 degrees (days)2 8 8 15 Lowest Daily Temperature (degrees)35 36 33 32 Average Monthly Low Temperature (degrees)45 44 44 41 Monthly Precipitation (inches)0.72 2.16 2.23 3.26 City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00641 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:3-B Summer Weather Extremes, 2019 June July August September Daily High Temperature above 100 degrees (days)7 15 18 7 Highest Daily Temperature (degrees)106 107 108 104 Average Monthly High Temperature (degrees)94 99 99 91 Monthly Precipitation (inches)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Winter Weather Extremes, 2019 November December January February Daily Low Temperature below 40 degrees (days)2 8 8 15 Lowest Daily Temperature (degrees)35 36 33 32 Average Monthly Low Temperature (degrees)45 44 44 41 Monthly Precipitation (inches)0.72 2.16 2.23 3.26 1.The proposed FMC update will extend the use of limited emergency shelter resources.The following table compares the cost of sheltering for a single occupant in an emergency sleeping cabin,as currently recommended under the CBC,compared to the cost of sheltering 4 occupants in the proposed amendment while concurrently meeting the City’s ADA requirement.There is a significant increase in impact resulting from cost savings if the proposed action is approved. Per Cabin Occupancy Cost per Emergency Sleeping Cabin Cost for 30 Cabins Number of Persons Housed Cost per person Existing CBC Language allowing 1 occupant per 100 s.f. cabin $ 7,922 $ 237,660 30 $ 7,922 Proposed Double occupancy, 30 cabins with 2 occupants per 100.s.f. $ 8,102 $ 243,060 30 $ 4,051 Proposed Quad occupancy, 28 cabins with 4 occupants per 100 s.f. and 2 ADA compliant cabins with 2 occupants per 100 s.f. $ 8,462 $ 253,860 116 $ 2,188 ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This approval is not a project for the purposes of CEQA Guidelines section 15378. The proposed local amendments to the California Building Code Title 24 Appendix O104 do not commit the City to a definite course of action with regard to carrying out a specific project and do not in and of themselves have the potential for resulting in either a direct or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. The proposed amendment does not change the standards for constructing emergency sleeping cabins, and will not result in the approval of any particular structures. Rather, the proposed amendment adjusts the number of persons permitted to occupy a certain square footage from one occupant in 100 square feet to 4 occupants in 100 square feet. Future projects that will use these standards will be required to submit independent applications to the City. As such, adjusting the occupant to square footage ratio, is not a project for the purposes of CEQA Guidelines section 15378 and no further analysis is required. City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID 20-00641 Agenda Date:5/21/2020 Agenda #:3-B LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference does not apply because this item is an amendment to an existing ordinance. FISCAL IMPACT No additional General Fund appropriations are required for this amendment. Attachment: Ordinance City of Fresno Printed on 12/12/2022Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™